Is evolution a fact?

[Deleted member 619]

Ask yourself this question: has Aron Ra ever proved himself right?

Many times. More importantly, and this is the bit you don't get about how science really works, what he's said has been independently verified.

Then reel it into evolution... And bring me the evidence he has ever brought to prove himself right.

He's right. It's been verified. That's the entire story.

Honestly, is this trolling bullshit all you've got, ignorant fuck? If so, fuck off. Your trolling is not wanted here.

You really are the most ignorant prick I ever came across, and that's in a field that includes VenomfangX, Robert Byers, Mick, Steveebeee, and all manner of stupid cunts, but you really are the most stupid of all of them. We should erect a fucking statue.

 

[Mr_Wilford]

And there he is being pissy

 

[Deleted member 619]

Getting pretty close to going full hackenslash on this moron, which would only earn me a posting holiday, so I'll bow out here.

 

[Mr_Wilford]

Right special frog " your fairly certain"

I know what he said.

But you go on believing in your " fairly certain". That's a good atheist.

Quote it. Give us the exact quote he said. I will be checking for context

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

Dragan glas I'm not here to respond to your rebuttal of my claims. You can have your response. What do I think of your response? Perfectly coherent within the confines of your presuppositions.

Then why do you continue with this charade? You appear to not be interested in anything except to deny that your claims have been disproven regarding "evolutionary presuppositions".

How can you continue ignoring this fact?

If you consider yourself a Christian, how can you behave in this way?

What would Jesus do?

Kindest regards,

James

 

[SpecialFrog]

Right special frog " your fairly certain"

I know what he said.

But you go on believing in your " fairly certain". That's a good atheist.

Quote his post then if you think it says what you did.

There's more... I can write a book on the ignorance of atheists.....

I suspect you would not find a publisher for it as it would be incoherent and inaccurate.

 

[Deleted member 619]

See call opponent stupid... Hack is being a good atheist.
And troll.. That's another point.

How many points do you want, stupid cunt? I have more insults than you have words in your entire fucking lexicon, dunderhead.

 

[Deleted member 619]

Full hack? Oh my that is going to be so hard to handle...

Please don't blow up... That will get me banned because you not being able to handle yourself will be blamed on me. It's how atheists work.

No, rhymes-with-anchor. I take responsibility for my fucking actions, you ignorant twonk.

 

[Deleted member 619]

Find it yourself I would much rather you hold your " fairly certain" beliefs

I don't need beliefs. You're a known and demonstrated liar. Until you support any given claim, the default is 'lying cunt' (cunt optional, except you're a cunt).

We all know Aron said no such thing. Feel free to refute it with evidence.

 

[Mr_Wilford]

Find it yourself I would much rather you hold your " fairly certain" beliefs

I don't need beliefs. You're a known and demonstrated liar. Until you support any given claim, the default is 'lying cunt' (cunt optional, except you're a cunt).

We all know Aron said no such thing. Feel free to refute it with evidence.

I'm willing to bet money that the "quote" will turn out like whay he did with "let's agree to disagree"

 

[Deleted member 619]

Well " we all know Aron said no such thing" Is hilarious.

You don't know " your fairly certain"

Try to keep up.

I'm certain of nothing, which is why I asked you to link me to where he said it.

 

[SpecialFrog]

So I can't "just" present evidence. That wouldn't mean anything if you don't even know what we're talking about. If you ever decide that understanding how things really are is better than pretending to believe things you know aren't true, then may you'll man-up and honor your agreement, and get passed step one. Then we'll go to step two, which is where we find out what evidence you would accept, and then we'll go to step three -where I show it to you. But you're not going to do that because your position depends on you not understanding any of this. So you're going to make sure that you don't. That's why you want to do this backwards. It's petty, childish, and sad, but that's how faith is.

Oh look. Aron said what I said he did and Bernhard has once again been demonstrated to be full of shit.

 

[Deleted member 619]

I'm willing to bet money that the "quote" will turn out like whay he did with "let's agree to disagree"

Yep.

 

[Deleted member 619]

So I can't "just" present evidence. That wouldn't mean anything if you don't even know what we're talking about. If you ever decide that understanding how things really are is better than pretending to believe things you know aren't true, then may you'll man-up and honor your agreement, and get passed step one. Then we'll go to step two, which is where we find out what evidence you would accept, and then we'll go to step three -where I show it to you. But you're not going to do that because your position depends on you not understanding any of this. So you're going to make sure that you don't. That's why you want to do this backwards. It's petty, childish, and sad, but that's how faith is.

Oh look. Aron said what I said he did and Bernhard has once again been demonstrated to be full of shit.

If that's the quote he's talking about, we're done on that score.

 

[SpecialFrog]

Bernhard's response, demonstrating he adopted this dishonest interpretation straight away.

"So you "just" can't present evidence" thanks mr. Ra... I was seriously under the impression that you would at least attempt to present what you consider evidence.

And yes blame me,,, that I didn't honour the agreement...but the fact remains, you even admit... You haven't presented evidence.. You "just" can't present evidence.

So under the agreement you fail because you admit you didn't present evidence. You also failed your side of the bargain. You did not honour your side of the agreement... Because you admit you didn't bring evidence.

Does that make sense? I'll say it again. You admit you didn't bring evidence.....

Therefore you did not honour the agreement.

Blame me.. Yes of course... It is expected. But that does not change the fact.. You didn't bring evidence.

but mr. Ra..... All of that can change if you simply supply one piece of evidence.

Waiting.

 

[Mr_Wilford]

Inb4 "thats not the right quote"

Ask him for the one he means then

"Lawl find it for yourself"

 

[Collecemall]

Rather than have hack drop a few more fuckwits, cuntmonkeys, and arseblubbers or Bernard get the ban he's hoping for can an admin just put this thread out of it's misery?

 

[Deleted member 619]

cuntmonkeys

Yoink!

 

[SpecialFrog]

Page 10

"Our agreement, (which you are now childishly and dishonestly misrepresenting) was not to show you evidence, but rather to prove evolution to you. "


There is the gem.

Which agrees with what I said and not what you said, particularly in the context of the statement I quoted.

You are flat out lying here, Bernhard.

 

[Mr_Wilford]

Bernhard.visscher wrote:
"So you "just" can't present evidence" thanks mr. Ra... I was seriously under the impression that you would at least
attempt to present what you consider evidence.

The reason "just" is in quotations is to say that presenting evidence is not the ONLY thing I can do. Of course you know that, and are just being a disingenuous dick.

And yes blame me,,, that I didn't honour the agreement...but the fact remains, you even admit... You haven't presented evidence.. You "just" can't present evidence.

So under the agreement you fail because you admit you didn't present evidence. You also failed your side of the bargain. You did not honour your side of the agreement... Because you admit you didn't bring evidence.

Our agreement, (which you are now childishly and dishonestly misrepresenting) was not to show you evidence, but rather to prove evolution to you.

AronRa wrote:
The challenge is that I will prove to your satisfaction that evolution is a fact. Since I'm going to try to educate someone who is determined not to learn, then I can't just tell you things that you're already pre-programmed to reject. I have to engage you, to get you to think about this, and understand what we're talking about; to agree on what will be acceptable answers. That means we'll have to do a few rounds of Q&A, and you'll be expected to acknowledge certain points in sequence -to confirm that you are learning. The onus is on me, but only as long as you participate. If you repeatedly ignore direct questions or refuse to properly address critical points, you will default this conversation -as every other creationist on this forum has done so far. Do you understand and accept?

Bernhard Visscher wrote:
I accept

So yeah, you failed this challenge, not me, and you failed by being deliberately dishonest, which you have to just to be a creationist in the first place.

Every time I get a creationist into a forum like this, I hold out hope that he might be a reasonable innocently deceived person who is sincere and honest, but what I always get are immature lying trolls. (sigh).



And there's the context people