The stupidest thing a creatonist has ever said to you

[Krazyskooter]

I think that most of dotoree's posts can have a safe and comfy home in this topic...

Damn you beat me to that post.

 

[Gnug215]

Wow...

I've been looking at this topic for over a year now, and only just realized the spelling error.

Just goes to show that the mind sees what it wants to, I guess.

Anyway, recently I watched a video about someone building a life-size version of Noah's Ark, and a guy in the video was saying how the Ark stood for "Love and peace".

Swell.

I had to comment on that of course, which sent a creationist scurrying out from under some rock to contest my comment. Well, sort of, because he started rambling incoherently about why God destroyed the world, and how God was justified in doing so. The funny thing is that the guy made 14 frigging posts to respond to two of mine.

I had to repeat four or five times that destroying the world did NOT equal "Love and peace", really spelling it out in the end. I haven't heard from him for a few days now.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Remensum[/url]"]The term "ape" is not a 'scientific' term. If I referred to Patas monkeys as 'apes' it is only to lump them in with their wider *kind*. Gibbons are known as "lesser apes" but are very monkey-like in appearance. Gorillas, macaques, chimps, bonobos, gibbons, baboons are all the same class of arboreal primate with distinctive features that we don't have.

and

Anyway, I will let you carry on laughing to your heart's content......when you are ready to return to the level of civilized and rational discourse, and not that of *your* ape-like and comical ancestors, I will be glad to hear from you. Some of us have scientific papers to write and have published - one of them later this week, hopefully.

 

[AdmiralPeacock]

On youtube a while ago, I issued a challenge to the monotheists; particular the creationists. It was simple: Provide 5 simple irrefutable reasons to believe in your deity - if your god is real and as all power as you say - and you sacred text so perfect, you should be able to do it one, but I'll give you 5.

I've had plenty of lawls from that challenge, mostly from the Islamic crowd. Here's the latest gem.

hey m8. i am a Muslim and a student of science as well. I have just seen your video saying give 5 points to convert u..
i can just try to tell u the truth but obviously rest is on u. whether u struggle to seek the truth or not.
so m8, m giving u 4 points as from summery of concept of revolution and 5th point is of my own.
1. We all are connected.
2. Man came into being after revolutionary alterations in animals.
3. further it says animals came into being after revolutionary alterations in microorganisms (unicellular living beings)
4. these unicellular organisms came into being from a DNA and DNA came into being from .. atoms or least u can go to electrons, protons nutrons dutrons.. or.. last is ENERGY.
5. From where this energy came from? Who created that energy? and who ceased that energy to create us?

i give u a simple example mate as we know wood is raw material for making wooden furniture. if we have no wood, how can we make furniture?
and if we have a raw material, even then we need some 1 to convert this raw material to useful material..

"We Are All Connected"
MAN << ANIMALS << CELLS << UNICELLULAR ORGANISMS << DNA << PROTIENS << ATOMS << ELECTRONS, PROTONS NUTRONS ... ETC << ENERGY << ?? (we cant put a fullstop here)

MAN << ANIMALS << CELLS << UNICELLULAR ORGANISMS << DNA << PROTIENS << ATOMS << ELECTRONS, PROTONS NUTRONS ... ETC << ENERGY << SOME ONE

and whos that SOME ONE?
He is God, He is Allah. He is creator of every thing. and He is not like us!!. as some people assume that God means some one like us sitting on hevens.. no Hes not like this..
Thats why we Muslims believe that He is Allah and He is creator of every thing. And he is not like us.. as we are being created and He is a creator!!!

 

[australopithecus]

You believe science right? And who stated "religious beliefs"? The word religious isn't in the definition of religion. If you believe science you have a set of beliefs. That set of beliefs comprise of scientific laws and theories and whatever.

<i></i>

No, I don't 'believe' in science. I accept what can be domonstrated with evidence. Nothing more. Science is a tool and I no more believe in science to deomstrate facts than I believe a hammer will drive a nail into the wall.

And there is a STRAWMAN!

<i></i>

:|

 

[Cephei]

On youtube a while ago, I issued a challenge to the monotheists; particular the creationists. It was simple: Provide 5 simple irrefutable reasons to believe in your deity - if your god is real and as all power as you say - and you sacred text so perfect, you should be able to do it one, but I'll give you 5.

I've had plenty of lawls from that challenge, mostly from the Islamic crowd. Here's the latest gem.

hey m8. i am a Muslim and a student of science as well. I have just seen your video saying give 5 points to convert u..
i can just try to tell u the truth but obviously rest is on u. whether u struggle to seek the truth or not.
so m8, m giving u 4 points as from summery of concept of revolution and 5th point is of my own.
1. We all are connected.
2. Man came into being after revolutionary alterations in animals.
3. further it says animals came into being after revolutionary alterations in microorganisms (unicellular living beings)
4. these unicellular organisms came into being from a DNA and DNA came into being from .. atoms or least u can go to electrons, protons nutrons dutrons.. or.. last is ENERGY.
5. From where this energy came from? Who created that energy? and who ceased that energy to create us?

i give u a simple example mate as we know wood is raw material for making wooden furniture. if we have no wood, how can we make furniture?
and if we have a raw material, even then we need some 1 to convert this raw material to useful material..

"We Are All Connected"
MAN << ANIMALS << CELLS << UNICELLULAR ORGANISMS << DNA << PROTIENS << ATOMS << ELECTRONS, PROTONS NUTRONS ... ETC << ENERGY << ?? (we cant put a fullstop here)

MAN << ANIMALS << CELLS << UNICELLULAR ORGANISMS << DNA << PROTIENS << ATOMS << ELECTRONS, PROTONS NUTRONS ... ETC << ENERGY << SOME ONE

and whos that SOME ONE?
He is God, He is Allah. He is creator of every thing. and He is not like us!!. as some people assume that God means some one like us sitting on hevens.. no Hes not like this..
Thats why we Muslims believe that He is Allah and He is creator of every thing. And he is not like us.. as we are being created and He is a creator!!!

 

[AdmiralPeacock]

i wouldnt want you to just accept something, just a story told. but im not talkin about just any story. the story of Jesus Christ is backed up by so much evidence that its literately the best documented event in history! even time itself (BC and AD) reflects the impact of Christ coming to this earth

huh?

 

[AdmiralPeacock]

Wasn't said to me - saw it on FSTDT

The sun and the moon came into being at the same time. Of course, those of us who read the Bible already knew that. Why is it that science is just now learning it? I wonder...

 

[quantumfireball2099]

When talking about how to cure leprosy by use of blood magic came up with a Evangelical Christian (Leviticus 14:49-53) she said that it wasn't the birds blood that was doing the healing, it was the hyssop that was mentioned as it has anti-bacterial properties. I asked her what the point of the blood was and she said because blood is used to forgive sin. I then started talking about how a liquid could physically help with a spiritual qualm, as sin is, and this is how she responded;

"Healthy conversation is one thing, however in my opinion God and His Infallible Word is never subject to debate!" :roll:

I then asked a hypothecial question of "If Jesus' blood was found in some sort of vessel, would it have magical healing properties"

I have not heard from her since.

 

[scalyblue]

Hey Guys: one definition of "Creation Science" I'll accept is the one from Mclean v. Arkansas.

 

[RichardMNixon]

Hey Guys: one definition of "Creation Science" I'll accept is the one from Mclean v. Arkansas.

The definition ruled in a court of law to not be science? :lol:

 

[scalyblue]

Hey Guys: one definition of "Creation Science" I'll accept is the one from Mclean v. Arkansas.

The definition ruled in a court of law to not be science? :lol:

Precisely! That's one way to unconsciously convey an abdication of your position.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

This is from an on going discussion.

Remensum[/url]"]To date, no scientist has proposed a mathematical account of all the changes that would have been necessary to transmutate an australopith into a human - and many of these changes would have to be coordinated with a degree of synchrony - as with obligate bipedalism which requires many kinds of changes in different parts of the body. The stupid thing about cladistics is that it regards humans as "synapsids" like the dinosaur-like creature, Dimetrodon.

http://www.worldlingo.com/ma/enwiki/en/Synapsid

How can anyone take such a theory seriously if it makes such stupid assertions as that?

 

[AdmiralPeacock]

"Atheists have to deny all of history if they deny that Adam was a real person. They have to make up people's ancestors, which they've done by claiming that they are monkeys. That's the degree of irrationality that atheists have to descendend to deny God. No wonder they're angry and bitter."

 

[australopithecus]

The stupid thing about cladistics is that it regards humans as "synapsids" like the dinosaur-like creature, Dimetrodon.

He's got a point, we're also regarded as chordates like fish! How silly?! We're clearly not fish, I even get sea sick. Ever seen a sea sick fish? No, ergo, evolution is wrong.

:roll:

 

[RichardMNixon]

One fellow tried to deny the fact that science and education have made progress for the human species and offered Stalin's death camps and AIDS as "progress." I countered with one of the statements I'm prouder of making, bolstered by the new symphony of science

I'm defending a glorious present, in which we can travel to Oregon without fording the river or dying of dysentery.

He of course, still oblivious, continued belittling the lack of malaria in New York. Like, really.

Why do you think it will get better? Because there's no more malaria in NYC? That's an indicator? Please

This same fellow also denied that Orthodox Christians were theists. It was grand.

The discussion ended when he asked me to stop attacking Christians and attack Christ, at which point I said what I thought Christ's good points and bad points were, slavery among them. Using slavery and Christ in one sentence was apparently too outrageous for him, so he left.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

This is from an on going discussion.

Remensum[/url]"]Cats are felids and dogs are canids - two distinct families of "carnivore" (a completely arbitrary order of mammal). I would say that they share more in common with each other than do humans and apes. Certainly, each shares more in common with hyenas.

and

For goodness sake, the human cranium is not in any where near like that of a synapsid type! Dimetrodon (a true synapsid) is far more similar to Spinosaurus (a diapsid) than it is to Homo sapiens. Evolutionary systematics has obviously gone completely fruity.

 

[AdmiralPeacock]

The bible says the earth is fixed and not moveable. It does not say stationary. Can you move it? Push real hard and see.

 

[Gnug215]

The bible says the earth is fixed and not moveable. It does not say stationary. Can you move it? Push real hard and see.

Ok, who said that? And perhaps more importantly, when? (Please don't let it be the 21st or even 20th century... heck, nor the 19th.)

 

[RichardMNixon]

The bible says the earth is fixed and not moveable. It does not say stationary. Can you move it? Push real hard and see.

Ok, I just jumped. The Earth moved. Third law, bitches. Refuted now?

Also, didn't the Earthquake last year in Chile disrupt it's orbit or rotation or something by a barely significant margin?