Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 1594

[On evolution]... you are making guesses based on what you are observing billions of years after the fact which is hardly reliable (try to convict a person of a crime with evidence a billion years old. No judge would convict), while I have the eyewitness account of the one who was there, did it, and is incapable of not telling the truth about it. You may not accept that, but it doesn't change the truth of it." "You're right, the truth is the truth. You cannot change my view that 2+2=4, that water is wet, that I love my child, that heat rises, and that God told us the truth. Truth is truth reguardless of how badly you want to convince me its not. Again, science is the search for test results, I dont care about test results, I want the truth.

Rom831, Rapture Ready 8 Comments [11/1/2002 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1
Sir P

No judge would convict someone on basis of a "witness-account" which was written by friends of the witness.

3/13/2010 5:55:26 AM

Canadiest

You can't handle the truth.

Someone had to say it

If your so concerned with the weakness of old evidence, why do you trust a 2000 year old book?

3/13/2010 7:02:58 AM

Lizuka

Incapable of not telling the truth?

One, an omnipotent being shouldn't be incapable of anything. Two, he does lie in the Bible. Repeatedly.

9/22/2010 8:08:02 PM

rubber chicken

Fair enough, now provide evidence that this 'eyewitness' really was there, did it, and is incapable of not telling the truth about it.
In fact, some, (any), evidence of the actual existence of this 'eyewitness' would be nice.
The thing about truth is that you have to be able to prove that it is true.

9/22/2010 8:21:23 PM

Neith

Try to convict a person on hearsay, which is all your Bible is.

9/22/2010 10:56:11 PM

Justanotheratheist

If it is the truth that you want then you are so looking in the wrong place, and Rupture Ready will only lead you even further away from it.

You may find somebody "who was there" and who will swear blind that JFK was shot by a little green man from Mars using a nuclear powered pea-shooter. Wouldn't make it true, though.

9/23/2010 12:45:13 AM

Swede

You can also not convict on evidence 6-2 thousand years old. Eyewitness acount is the least reliable kind of evidence, ya know. The Bible was also carried by word of mouth for quite some time.

What's with the quotation marks between two sentences?
I have read quite a few quotations around here where people would disown their child if he/she turned out to be homosexual. How is that compatible with an universal truth that people love their children?

Science is not making guesses, it's making predictions, and when the predictions turns out correct, you move on to the next step in the scientific method.
Layman's theory =/= scientific theory.

9/23/2010 1:48:29 AM

Professor von SCIENCE!

Yeah, fucking microbiology is totally not observable and it's impossible for us to observe bacteria as it mutates and evolves. I guess highly educated scientists don't know squat when compared to sheep herders living in the desert who thought the earth was flat and sickness was the wrath of a mighty sky fairy. How could I be so blind as not to see you were right all along!

*for those who didn't realize it (specifically Rom831) that was sarcasm*

7/3/2013 7:39:04 PM
1