"I am sure science will find the answers. It always has and always will."
"Science", or rather secular humanist men of "science" have produced a plethora of lies in an attempt to discredit the bible, such as inventing the idea of an oort Cloud to explain away comets, when there is not physical or observed evidence it exists. It's the most bogus, ridiculous, silly, and falicious concept ever put forth in science, next to evolutionism that is.
47 comments
Oh, it's only NephilimFree.
The stupidity doesn't really burn me now, since it's something I've come to expect from him.
"'Science', or rather secular humanist men of "science" have produced a plethora of lies in an attempt to discredit the bible"
It's cute that you think they care about your delusion.
Discredit the bible? Ever see any 4 legged insects!? There, I discredited it.
Science & Evolution is reality, bitch. You're little Babble is mythical & a Fundies way of sticking his fingers in his ears and saying "I can't hear you, lalalala".
One realises that your religiously induced paranoia and delusions of reference will make it very unlikely you'll be able to grasp this idea, but I'm going to try and get it into your thick skull anyway:
Science is not out to attack the bible. Much like a Lovecraftian god, science doesn't hate religion; rather, it just doesn't give a fuck about it, and usually doesn't even bother to recognise its existence. It is simply of no consequence whatsoever.
Those scientific hypotheses, theories and laws that contradict your precious book of stories were not formulated specifically to do so by some evil cabal of propagandists consumed by hatred, but by sincere seekers of truth to fit observations made by scientific experiments, as impartially as they could manage. That they happen to piss all over the fairy tales you desperately cling to is a mere side effect, entirely coincidental.
Well, since NephilimFree was recently nominated for the Golden Crocoduck Award for the most blatant breach of the 9th Commandment in the Creationist cause, I suspect any credibility he may have accidentally picked up has now evaporated along with his brain.
And the fact that he was beaten by Kent Hovind shows he's not very good at it, and needs a new hobby. I suggest getting a life.
"idea of an oort Cloud to explain away comets, when there is not physical or observed evidence it exists"
Well, there's all the comets coming from it, aren't there?
Somehow I don't think that scientist the world wide do their work with the sole goal being discrediting the christian bible, In fact I think you'll find quite a few of them to be christians, not that I expect you to accept that fact. I think that you have an overly inflated sense of the importence of christianity to the world in general and the scientific community in specific.
You throw around terms "physical" and "observed" evidence convenietly ignoring the fact that you also have neither form of eveidence to back your own claims, and I think that if you actually did that little thing called research that you would find astronomers have "observed" evidence for the Oort cloud and other trans-kuiper celestial bodies.
such as inventing the idea of an oort Cloud to explain away comets,
And it's not even a hypothesis any more. Radiotelescropes have basically proven it exists.
Inventing the Oort cloud? You mean the one seen by the Hubble and other telescopes?
So, we are supposed to discount what has been seen, and accept a bunch of fables that can't be seen or proven as the truth?
Yeah, that'll happen.
@Nowonmai:
An Oort cloud object several 100 km in diameter would be less than 0.0001 arc-seconds across, which is considerably smaller than the HST can resolve.
The Oort cloud is a hypothetical source for long-period comets, it has never been observed.
http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/O/Oort+Cloud
Why NF is raising this fact is because if there were no external source for new LPCs, then there should not - after billions of years - be any LPCs left at all. So from a creationist viewpoint, the continued existence of long-period comets is proof that the Earth is not billions of years old.
Astoundingly, NF has managed to hit on genuine scientific mystery rather trot out than the usual inventions of creationists.
I.e. an argument from ignorance, for once, rather than an argument by ignorants.
"Creationsm", or rather fundamentalist humanist men of "creation" have produced a plethora of lies in an attempt to discredit science, such as inventing the idea of an uncreated creator to explain away evolution, when there is not physical or observed evidence it exists. It's the most bogus, ridiculous, silly, and falicious concept ever put forth in creation, next to the "son of god" that is.
Fixed.
Well, the Kuiper Belt was hypothesized for ages and now over 1000 objects are known. When the Kuiper Belt was first postulated, only Pluto and Charon were known. I suspect that a similar fate will soon befall the hypothesized Oort Cloud when greater observational and detection methods are used. In as much as that objects will start being found, namely comets, at the great distance of the Oort Cloud.
You fundy boys are pissing against the wind by trying to discredit science when it doesn't fit with your world-view. It generally has a habit of very quickly catching you up and rapidly over-taking you and swiftly giving you a hard nudge in the nuts on its way past.
You'd be better off forgetting about science, since you don't seem to know anything about it anyway, and instead just concentrate on your faith. You know "faith" that thing that doesn't need any evidence.
When you persist with these asinine assertions you and all the rest of you fundies sound like enormously stupid plonkers. Admittedly, it's quite amusing for the folks here though.
So there you are, you know what comes next, a straight 5.
So long NephilimFree you BrainFree nugget.
We don't need to discredit the Bible. It's existence already does that.
And I do agree: The Wholly Babble, er, Holy Bible is the "most bogus, ridiculous, silly, and falicious concept ever put forth"
Science doesn't give half a crap about the bible. And that's what's really insulting to you, isn't it? That the bible is so thoroughly disproved and that it's merely a side effect of the search for truth, not an attack on it?
Hypothesis != lie.
Epic fail.
Try again, idiot.
"Religion", or rather fundamentalist men of "faith" have produced a plethora of lies in an attempt to discredit scientific fact, such as inventing the idea of a God to explain away how this universe came to be, when there is not physical or observed evidence he exists. It's the most bogus, ridiculous, silly, and fallacious concept ever put forth in human history. Next to the existence of 'Reality TV'*, that is.
fixed
See? Works both ways, NephilimFAIL. Only my version has infinitely more credibility.
*- Like wasps. And flies. 'Reality TV'. WHY?!
"bogus, ridiculous, silly, and falicious"
If you're going to bother getting the thesaurus out, at least use it to check your spelling.
Oort clouds have been observed you dipshit. Not only have we seen objects from the edges of them in our own solar system, we've also observed them around other stars.
Although even from a fundie perspective this one completely baffles me. Since when do oort clouds contradict their silly views? This has to be some sort of troll.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
