Activity Stream
227,828 MEMBERS
1843 ONLINE
greengrassforums On YouTube Subscribe to our Newsletter greengrassforums On Twitter greengrassforums On Facebook greengrassforums On Google+
banner1

Page 31 of 33 FirstFirst ... 212930313233 LastLast
Results 301 to 310 of 324
  1.     
    #301
    Senior Member

    Science Disproves Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by dejayou30
    Can someone PLEASE lock this thread and ban this nutjob? The guy has only posted in this thread with his illogical creationist spam. It would be like someone joining only to post advertisements for something. He is advertising for his creationist nonsense and is not interested in the cannabis community. Look at his posts, 100% of them are all in this thread. Ban this spammer!
    I am not interested in entering into endless quibbling over the information I am sharing because I believe the information speaks for itself. If you disagree, that??s fine. I believe the free exchange of facts is a healthy, profitable way to discover truth, but your disagreement is with the scientists being quoted, not me.

    The mentality of unredeemed human nature has remained unchanged since Cain murdered Abel over a disagreement. History is full of examples of people silencing those with whom they disagree:

    Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were thrown into the fiery furnace because they refused to worship the king??s idol.

    Daniel was thrown into the lion??s den for worshipping God, contrary to the king??s decree.

    Jesus was crucified because the religious authorities disagreed with Him.

    His disciples were tortured and murdered because the authorities disagreed with them.

    Thousands were murdered for disagreeing with the Roman Catholic Church during the inquisition.

    Hitler murdered millions of Jews, Christians and others because he disagreed with them.

    Over 100,000,000 people have been murdered under atheist communism for disagreeing with them.

    Muslims murder everyone who disagrees with them.

    So you are definitely in the majority when you want to silence me because you disagree with the facts I am sharing that challenge your worldview.

    You are not interested in logic, reason, or even evidence for that matter. You don't want God to exist so you deny any evidence, or logical deduction that might support creation. You deny conventions of logic. You pretend skepticism of any evidence demonstrating creation, and adhere to any and all unscientific absurdities and impossibilities as long they support your erroneous worldview.

    Some of you try to explain the universe as causeless because some schools of quantum theory interpret certain phenomena as popping into existence without a cause, even though none of these phenomena are fully understood or observable, nor could any of them take place without the experiments causing them to take place.

    Apparently you don't really care. Epistemological truth is inconsequential to you. Apparently your purpose here has nothing to do with any serious discussion. You only feign interest in an attempt to entrap anyone foolish enough to think you are interested in serious discussion.

    Usually, all I have found here is a nauseatingly endless series of conflicting absurdities and irrational arguments, which in your own cognitive dissonance you oddly believe to be logical, clever and reasonable.

    If reason truly does champion truth, whatever school of reason that belongs to is completely absent in this forum.

    The refusal to believe facts in this and other instances may run deeper than just simple fear, hatred or partisanship. Perhaps some people invest so much of themselves into a certain political, religious, philosophical or scientific viewpoint, that their identity and sense of self becomes bonded to it. The bond is so strong that any fact that disproves even a small part of their particular viewpoint is interpreted as a direct attack upon their own self-identity. This can lead to retaliation in the form of wild accusations or character attacks upon the people promoting such facts (i.e. stop the message by killing the messenger).

    If this is true, then you can probably never prove any disagreeable facts to such people. They??ve traded introspection and reason for the security, comfort, and certainty that their viewpoints, and thus their identities, are always 100 percent correct.

  2.     
    #302
    Senior Member

    Science Disproves Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Pahu78
    I am not interested in entering into endless quibbling over the information I am sharing because I believe the information speaks for itself. If you disagree, that??s fine. I believe the free exchange of facts is a healthy, profitable way to discover truth, but your disagreement is with the scientists being quoted, not me.

    The mentality of unredeemed human nature has remained unchanged since Cain murdered Abel over a disagreement. History is full of examples of people silencing those with whom they disagree:

    Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were thrown into the fiery furnace because they refused to worship the king??s idol.

    Daniel was thrown into the lion??s den for worshipping God, contrary to the king??s decree.

    Jesus was crucified because the religious authorities disagreed with Him.

    His disciples were tortured and murdered because the authorities disagreed with them.

    Thousands were murdered for disagreeing with the Roman Catholic Church during the inquisition.

    Hitler murdered millions of Jews, Christians and others because he disagreed with them.

    Over 100,000,000 people have been murdered under atheist communism for disagreeing with them.

    Muslims murder everyone who disagrees with them.

    So you are definitely in the majority when you want to silence me because you disagree with the facts I am sharing that challenge your worldview.

    You are not interested in logic, reason, or even evidence for that matter. You don't want God to exist so you deny any evidence, or logical deduction that might support creation. You deny conventions of logic. You pretend skepticism of any evidence demonstrating creation, and adhere to any and all unscientific absurdities and impossibilities as long they support your erroneous worldview.

    Some of you try to explain the universe as causeless because some schools of quantum theory interpret certain phenomena as popping into existence without a cause, even though none of these phenomena are fully understood or observable, nor could any of them take place without the experiments causing them to take place.

    Apparently you don't really care. Epistemological truth is inconsequential to you. Apparently your purpose here has nothing to do with any serious discussion. You only feign interest in an attempt to entrap anyone foolish enough to think you are interested in serious discussion.

    Usually, all I have found here is a nauseatingly endless series of conflicting absurdities and irrational arguments, which in your own cognitive dissonance you oddly believe to be logical, clever and reasonable.

    If reason truly does champion truth, whatever school of reason that belongs to is completely absent in this forum.

    The refusal to believe facts in this and other instances may run deeper than just simple fear, hatred or partisanship. Perhaps some people invest so much of themselves into a certain political, religious, philosophical or scientific viewpoint, that their identity and sense of self becomes bonded to it. The bond is so strong that any fact that disproves even a small part of their particular viewpoint is interpreted as a direct attack upon their own self-identity. This can lead to retaliation in the form of wild accusations or character attacks upon the people promoting such facts (i.e. stop the message by killing the messenger).

    If this is true, then you can probably never prove any disagreeable facts to such people. They??ve traded introspection and reason for the security, comfort, and certainty that their viewpoints, and thus their identities, are always 100 percent correct.
    You are the victim of an alien hoax. Aliens manufactured the Jesus hoax to stamp out scientific advancement. We are getting too far advanced for the aliens liking so they are sending telepathic messages to people to post illogical drivel to keep the creationist view alive. Luckily I am wearing my tinfoil hat and am immune to this psi ray. You appear to be one of the unlucky ones. Stick your fingers in the nearest AC outlet to de-program yourself. Good luck and 'god' speed.

  3.     
    #303
    Senior Member

    Science Disproves Evolution

    Actually Pahu, you havent come up with a credible arguement yet. No recent evidence, you certaintly havent replied to any of my posts with backup evidence after I counter your view. Your latest post stinks of racism and close mindedness.

    I am not impressed with your debate capabilities, but if you want to continue your fools argument no one is stopping you. Just keep the personal attacks to a minimum, and try to find some solid, RECENT evidence for what you have to say. I personally would like to see something from the last 20 years that is not taken out of context to back up what you are saying.

    I am an open minded person, and I consider new facts as they come, which often change how I see the world. Its called learning. Please, teach me if you see fit. Otherwise, I think Ill stick to proven theories from the latest information I have, especially when they are proved by people much smarter than I.

  4.     
    #304
    Senior Member

    Science Disproves Evolution

    What evidence is there that God, any God, exists? You are deranged. Your 40 year old quotes are irreluvant, and your "evidence" is only evidence because its formed on false pretenses. Again, if you don't understand how science works, you can't possibly try to refute it. In the end, there is a mountain of evidence to support evolution, and ZERO evidence that supports creationism. If creationism is true and evolution false, why did Judge Jones not rule in favor of the Discovery Institute in the 2006 Dover Trial? Why were they unable to present any evidence of any of their claims, and moreover, why did they consistently deny the evidence shown to them by the scientists testifying as expert witnesses on behalf of evolution? Is it just some big conspiracy? Do I just not have my tinfoil hat on tight enough? What is it? How can you explain the fact that every claim of Creationism has been completely and utterly refuted by real science?

    Creationism is an intellectual dead end. If we accepted "God dun it" as an answer, we would get nowhere. Scientists and proponents of science understand this, and people like you obviously do not. It has nothing to do with atheism, and has everything to do with what is correct and what is incorrect. Sadly, creationism has been proven to be incorrect in every one of its claims. I would expect people to understand when their arguments have been thorougly defeated and accept that their information is wrong, and yet there are still dimwits like you that insist on perpetuating the nonsense.

    You are the one with the preconception that "God dun it" and are twisting the "evidence" to fit your claims, like putting a square peg in a circular hole. Those of us that understand how science works understand that your information and conclusions are flawed at best. It is not worth it to us to "debate" you, as the debate has already been waged by professionals, and when it comes to legitimate, peer reviewed evidence of claims, the scientists that trust evolution always win.

    I don't want to silence you because I disagree with you (which I do), I want to silence you because you are a spammer and are spreading misinformation without even understanding why it is misinformation. You have nothing to do with the cannabis community and only want to spread your creationist drivel across the internet wherever possible. The moderators should understand that you are like an advertiser, meaning that you don't contribute anything to the community except for your incorrect information regarding the origins of life, just as someone spamming replica Nike shoes is going to post about that and only that.

    Your facts are not facts, no matter how badly you want them to be. I know I cannot convince you of this, but I think something needs to be done to end this nonsense spam. Someone, please ban this spammer and lock this thread, as he is contributing nothing and is actively spreading misinformation that has been thoroughly refuted by PROFESSIONALS in the field of SCIENCE.

  5.     
    #305
    Senior Member

    Science Disproves Evolution

    [align=center]
    Immune Systems
    [/align]

    How could immune systems of animals and plants have evolved? Each immune system can recognize invading bacteria, viruses, and toxins. Each system can quickly mobilize the best defenders to search out and destroy these invaders. Each system has a memory and learns from every attack.

    Your health, and that of many animals, depends on the effectiveness of these ??search-and-destroy missions.? Consider the capabilities and associated equipment the white blood cell must have to do its job. It must identify friend and foe. Once a foe is detected, the white blood cell must rapidly locate and overtake the invader. Then the white blood cell must engulf the bacterium, destroy it, and have the endurance to repeat this many times. Miniaturization, fuel efficiency, and compatibility with other parts of the body are also key requirements. The equipment for each function requires careful design. Unless all this worked well from the beginning of life, a requirement that rules out evolution, bacteria and other agents of disease would have won, and we would not be here to marvel at these hidden abilities in our bodies.

    A few ??stem cells? in your bone marrow produce more than 100 billion of these and other types of blood cells every day. Each white blood cell moves on its own at up to 30 microns (almost half the diameter of a human hair) each minute. So many white blood cells are in your body that their total distance traveled in one day would circle the earth twice.

    If the many instructions that direct an animal??s or plant??s immune system had not been preprogrammed in the organism??s genetic system when it first appeared on earth, the first of thousands of potential infections would have killed the organism. This would have nullified any rare genetic improvements that might have accumulated. In other words, the large amount of genetic information governing the immune system could not have accumulated in a slow, evolutionary sense (a). Obviously, for each organism to have survived, this information must have all been there from the beginning. Again, creation.

    (a.) ??We can look high or we can look low, in books or in journals, but the result is the same. The scientific literature has no answers to the question of the origin of the immune system.? Behe, p. 138.

    ??Unfortunately, we cannot trace most of the evolutionary steps that the immune system took. Virtually all the crucial developments seem to have happened at an early stage of vertebrate evolution, which is poorly represented in the fossil record and from which few species survive. Even the most primitive extant vertebrates seem to rearrange their antigen receptor genes and possess separate T and B cells, as well as MHC molecules. Thus has the immune system sprung up fully armed.? Avrion Mitchison, ??Will We Survive?? Scientific American, Vol. 269, September 1993, p. 138.

    In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - 40. Immune Systems

  6.     
    #306
    Senior Member

    Science Disproves Evolution

    How about putting this in the spirituality board with all the other mumbo jumbo.

  7.     
    #307
    Senior Member

    Science Disproves Evolution

    [align=center]
    Living Technology 1
    [/align]

    Most complex phenomena known to science are found in living systems??including those involving electrical, acoustical, mechanical, chemical, and optical phenomena. Detailed studies of various animals also have revealed certain physical equipment and capabilities that the world??s best designers, using the most sophisticated technologies, cannot duplicate. Examples of these designs include molecular-size motors in most living organisms (a); advanced technologies in cells (b); miniature and reliable sonar systems of dolphins, porpoises, and whales; frequency-modulated ??radar? and discrimination systems of bats (c); efficient aerodynamic capabilities of hummingbirds; control systems, internal ballistics, and the combustion chambers of bombardier beetles (d); precise and redundant navigational systems of many birds, fish, and insects (e); and especially the self-repair capabilities of almost all forms of life. No component of these complex systems could have evolved without placing the organism at a selective disadvantage until the component??s evolution was complete. All evidence points to intelligent design.

    a. ??Life implies movement. Most forms of movement in the living world are powered by tiny protein machines known as molecular motors.? Manfred Schliwa and Günther Woehlke, ??Molecular Motors,? Nature, Vol. 422, 17 April 2003, p. 759.

    b. ??We would see [in cells] that nearly every feature of our own advanced machines had its analogue in the cell: artificial languages and their decoding systems, memory banks for information storage and retrieval, elegant control systems regulating the automated assembly of parts and components, error fail-safe and proof-reading devices utilized for quality control, assembly processes involving the principle of prefabrication and modular construction. In fact, so deep would be the feeling of deja-vu, so persuasive the analogy, that much of the terminology we would use to describe this fascinating molecular reality would be borrowed from the world of late twentieth-century technology.

    ??What we would be witnessing would be an object resembling an immense automated factory, a factory larger than a city and carrying out almost as many unique functions as all the manufacturing activities of man on earth. However, it would be a factory which would have one capacity not equalled in any of our own most advanced machines, for it would be capable of replicating its entire structure within a matter of a few hours. To witness such an act at a magnification of one thousand million times would be an awe-inspiring spectacle.?
    Denton, p. 329.

    c. ??Ounce for ounce, watt for watt, it [the bat] is millions of times more efficient and more sensitive than the radars and sonars contrived by man.? Pitman, p. 219.

    d. Robert E. Kofahl and Kelly L. Segraves, The Creation Explanation (Wheaton, Illinois: Harold Shaw Publishers, 1975), pp. 2??9.

    Thomas Eisner and Daniel J. Aneshansley, ??Spray Aiming in Bombardier Beetles: Jet Deflection by the Coanda Effect,? Science, Vol. 215, 1 January 1982, pp. 83??85.

    Behe, pp. 31??36.

    e. Jason A. Etheredge et al., ??Monarch Butterflies (Danaus plexippus L.) Use a Magnetic Compass for Navigation,? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 96, No. 24, 23 November 1999, pp. 13845??13846.

  8.     
    #308
    Senior Member

    Science Disproves Evolution

    The first quote by a legitimate scientists states a known fact, but tells nothing of interest. It would appear as if you are trying to establish some kind of legitimacy for your argument by quoting them, based on their backgrounds as legitimate, respected scientists. You then go on to quote from Michael Denton, Sean Pitman, and Michael Behe, who are all creationists, and although they do have legitimate degrees in the fields of science, they have never had any of their ideas, theories, hypothesises, or evidence in relation to creationism accepted by the scientific community. Their research is full of logical fallacies, confirmation bias, misconceptions, and just plain bad information.

    Michael Denton also has distanced himself from the Discovery (creationist) Instutute, and no longer stands by his creationist claims:
    Denton's views have changed over the years. He was influenced by Lawrence J. Henderson (1878-1942), Paul Davies and John Barrow who argued for an Anthropic Principle in the cosmos (Denton 1998, v, Denton 2005). Thus his second book Nature's Destiny (1998) is his biological contribution on the Anthropic Principle debate which is dominated by physicists. He argues for a law-like evolutionary unfolding of life. He no longer associates with Discovery, and the Institute no longer lists him as a fellow.
    Keep the bullshit coming Pahu, I'll be glad to refute it until someone locks this SPAM thread.

  9.   Advertisements

  10.     
    #309
    Senior Member

    Science Disproves Evolution

    Pahu78 rather than posting dogma will you please try and counter the arguments and discussions that you are having levelled against you. You are showing yourself as a spammer while being ripped apart by science. Do us a favour and give us a credible comeback.

  11.     
    #310
    Senior Member

    Science Disproves Evolution

    I doubt that will happen bhouncy. He stated a few posts back that he has no interest in "entering into endless quibbling over the information he is sharing," as he feels it "speaks for itself". In other words, he has no counter arguments to the facts levied against him, and refuses to consider other positions. His mind is made up despite contrary evidence, and all he is doing is spamming the members of this board with nonsense.

    You cannot reason with a creationist. No amount of evidence will ever make them second guess their "Buy-bull". For the last time, can someone lock this and ban Pahu78? He has made no other posts except in this thread, and refuses to have actual discussion about the information being presented; therefore he and his posts are spam.

Page 31 of 33 FirstFirst ... 212930313233 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. evolution
    By 420ultimatesmokage in forum Science
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-14-2007, 07:36 PM
  2. Evolution
    By dankkeeper in forum Spirituality
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 05-05-2007, 11:28 PM
  3. To the science majors/scientists/science geeks out there...
    By iwantFUEGO in forum GreenGrassForums Lounge
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: 10-30-2006, 04:41 AM
  4. Evolution or God????. . . .
    By LOVElife in forum Spirituality
    Replies: 249
    Last Post: 06-06-2006, 02:23 PM
  5. Evolution or God????. . . .
    By in forum GreenGrassForums Lounge
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-01-1970, 12:00 AM
Amount:

Enter a message for the receiver:
BE SOCIAL
GreenGrassForums On Facebook