1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 25 26 | bottom
Quote# 4360

[Replying to 'So a father has a right to rape his daughters?']I do not condone those actions, what he does within his castle has nothing to do with me. if i chose to interfere then i am disrespecting that family's rights the same as the father is disrespecting his daughters rights... Two wrongs don't make a right... You can't condone abuseing family rights and condem the father for abuseing his dauthers rights your doing the same thing as him... Its called disrespect and i find to be quite sad just how many people don't respect other peoples rights.

Haylow, Internet Infidels 9 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 15

Quote# 4361

No thats not what im saying, im saying society can't do anything about it without society becomeing disrespectful to peoples rights the same as parents who beat, rape and therefor be disrespectful to there children's rights

Haylow, Internet Infidels 5 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 4362

Parents are free to beat and rape and kill, we all are free to do these things and why i don't condone these actions i have to respect that people have free will to do these actions if i don't then i am just another disrespectful person in this world... Its not beating people thats wrong its disrespecting of a persons rights thats wrong.

Haylow, Internet Infidels 15 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 4363

Now, what happens if you are right? We both die in ground, and i won't particularly care whether i lead people to believe in something incorrect. I'll be too dead to worry about it.

Magus55, Internet Infidels 10 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 4364

So, follow the scientific method and observe, test and recreate the big bang, life from non-life, evolve me a man from a primate, a planet/star being created, and on and on and on.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 1 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 4365

But you are saying, although we canoot observe, test or recreate evolution, the big bang, billions of years, life from non life etc, its still science because it seems to fit what we can test. Sorry, Not buying it.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 2 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 4366

And no we cant observe planets and stars being formed, it takes billions of years. You may CLAIM to see readings that indicate a certain body is in the process of it, but a) you are not observing it, just data and b) you have only 'seen' it for a fraction of the time required.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 1 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 4367

We continue to observe <u>the effects of</u> electrons, enough to believe to a high degree of certainly they exist. One cannot observe the beginning our our universe.&quot; [Emphasis added]

joelch2, Rapture Ready 13 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 4368

This [detectable, specific, predictable effects of the Big Bang and evolution] is not the same... None of these prove anything, we just interpret it to mean whatever. An eyewitness account or a test tube full of 'starter stuff' would help immensely.

HeIsEnough, Rapture Ready 3 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 4369

I don't believe there was a Big Bang... But I do believe that there may have been a central starting point and everything is expanding and moving away from each other.

joelch2, Rapture Ready 18 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 4370

This is what science does. When it hits the supernatural wall, it searches for a way around it. It has been successful so far, I'm sure it will continue to do so. In my opinion, it will be at the cost of many souls.

HeIsEnough, Rapture Ready 6 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 4371

If the idea of electrons are based as loosely on stories that fit intrepretations of evidence as the big bang and evolution, then I would be as skeptical. But I have no reason to believe this as I have not researched it.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 8 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 4372

Further, it [evolution] doesn't meet any of the qualifications of the Scientifuic Method except maybe being able to make a hypothesis (which is to come AFTER observation so its arguable not even that is valid).

Rom831, Rapture Ready 4 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 4373

That [indirect observation and testing] is a goofy loophole those desperate to condone their faith try to allow. But it is dishonest and false. If you follow the scientific method you must observe something and test. If you test DNA you have a theory on DNA. If you test isotopic decay you can have a theory on isotoipic decay. If you test red shifts you can get a theory on red shifts. You do not test DNA and all of a sudden have evolution.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 8 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 4374

hmmmm... you observed chromosomes, made a[n extremely unlikely] perdiction on chromosomes [using evolution], tested the chromosomes and repeated the test on chromosomes [with remarkable success]. Cool, now observe, test and repeat evolution. Chromosomes are not evolution.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 0 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 4375

Not seeing cells has nothing to do with not seeing flying pigs. Just because one exists has no bearing on the other. Your major stance in this whole thread is comparing two things which have no bearing on each other. If electrons do or do not exist has no relavance to evolution, the big bang, etc. Give it up. You may be able to fool a grade school student with this nonscense, but its not getting you anywhere here.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 4 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 4376

How about you produce a human from a primate. You choose. Any primate. Have at it and get back to me. ;) Seriously, evolve me something. Not a fly from a fly or dog from a dog, but a real evolution like is required for your 'theory'. Primate to human, lizard to bird, cow to whale, fish to frog, reptile to mammal. I want to OBSERVE it happen, see the TEST results, and be able to REPRODUCE it. Those are, after all, the steps of the Scientific Method. Anything less would fall outside science and into philosophy (or science fiction).

Rom831, Rapture Ready 13 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 4377

Your posts indicate you to be an intelligent person so I have to believe you understand the truth in this. So either you have for so long been dishonest about this whole thing that you have actually lied yourself into really believing all that malarky, or you know full well it [evolution] is garbage and just insist on it because 'it has to be true' or else your faith fails and you are desperate to hold onto it. Even if it means sacrificing real science in the name of your faith.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 3 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 0

Quote# 4378

It stands that evolution (not chromosomes, fossils, dna, etc which are not evolution) has never been observed, tested or recreated of which all are part of the requirements of the scientific method which real science stands on. Continuing this further is merely beating a dead horse.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 11 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 4379

Either way, evolve me something, and then repeat it until there are no discrepancies. Oh, and I personally believe the rapture is going to happen within the next 30 years so ya' gotta hurry...

Rom831, Rapture Ready 9 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 4380

Darwinism on the other hand, claims I fell off the monkey tree. Seeing that my hands don't look like my feet, I remain unconvinced.

HeIsEnough, Rapture Ready 12 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 8

Quote# 4381

They are black and white... no middle ground. Jesus didn't evolve from frogs. If he did, he can't 'save' anyone.

joelch2, Rapture Ready 14 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 4382

Wrong again [on evolution not being a religion]. One definition for religion is 'A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.' That is not watered down, it is straight from the dictionary and like it or not, fits evolution/billions of years to a tee. Pouting won't change it.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 12 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 4383

All I can say is if you have a problem with the definition of 'religion', you need to take it up with Mr. Webster. Its his definition, not mine.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 2 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 4384

[Replying to 'did you look up equivocation?']So the dictionary uses expressions with double meanings with the purpose to mislead. Riiiiight....

joelch2, Rapture Ready 2 Comments [9/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 25 26 | top