The stupidest thing a creatonist has ever said to you

[Inferno]

certainly.
if we describe intellect as an object that is possible of evolving (though this may be in a very broad sense).
from creationism we can see how intellect evolved from envoking gods for everything to explaining it via evidence and reasoning.
were creationism take over competely a school system and run freely, it would most certainly start to ensist their prefered deity is the explenation for a certain phenomena, even though a perfect naturalistic explanation is present.
eventhough if this were to happen, creationism will never be like creationism was in the 1600, due to the loss of certain grounds on knowledge ( thanks to scientific discoveries).

I'm not sure what that has to do with Evolutionary Development, but sure, I agree.

 

[Mithcoriel]

The most hilarious thing about his logic though is that it can be so perfectly turned against him.

So Ken, were you there when Jesus supposedly rose from the dead?

It's easy to laugh at such moronic idiocy, but then the realisation that he goes around telling this stuff to children who do not know any better hits you. That thought kinda takes away the humour and makes me want to destroy things...

But you know what he'll reply: that God was there to witness it.

Ken Ham: Who was always there?
Children: God!
Ken Ham: In a loud and clear voice: who should you always believe, God or the scientists?
Children: GOD!!
Ken Ham: And I wan't you to remember that.

:roll:

 

[nemesiss]

The most hilarious thing about his logic though is that it can be so perfectly turned against him.

So Ken, were you there when Jesus supposedly rose from the dead?

It's easy to laugh at such moronic idiocy, but then the realisation that he goes around telling this stuff to children who do not know any better hits you. That thought kinda takes away the humour and makes me want to destroy things...

But you know what he'll reply: that God was there to witness it.

Ken Ham: Who was always there?
Children: God!
Ken Ham: In a loud and clear voice: who should you always believe, God or the scientists?
Children: GOD!!
Ken Ham: And I wan't you to remember that.

:roll:

i wonder if we could pull a "did YOU witness god do [X] ?"
us: oh, you didn't...? then here, a nice warm cup of STFU !

 

[Inferno]

i wonder if we could pull a "did YOU witness god do [X] ?"
us: oh, you didn't...? then here, a nice warm cup of STFU !

I've proposed that years ago. The standard reply is "But we don't need to have witnessed it, because we have the Bible. And we know the Bible is perfect because God said so. And we know he said so cuz it's in the Bible. And we know the Bible is perfect because..."
It just reveals their bias toward the Bible and against scientific evidence.

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

I found this little gem. I replied he should first read about down syndrome before I start a discussion with him.

@hobbitsarecool also, did you know that the genetic code consists of millions of codings, yet if 3 of them are off, its fatal? Down Syndrome, you guessed it, less than 3, actually its 1/2 of the 13th chromosome. Thats it. Mutations change the genetic coding, but if you change more, than 3 you die. Also I didn't believe entirely in evolution even before i was a christian when I was in medical school.
tanner1300 1 day ago

 

[nemesiss]

i wonder if we could pull a "did YOU witness god do [X] ?"
us: oh, you didn't...? then here, a nice warm cup of STFU !

I've proposed that years ago. The standard reply is "But we don't need to have witnessed it, because we have the Bible. And we know the Bible is perfect because God said so. And we know he said so cuz it's in the Bible. And we know the Bible is perfect because..."
It just reveals their bias toward the Bible and against scientific evidence.

then i think you didn't pressure them enough.
you could have played it like this:

now a witness isn't needed? NOW A WITNESS ISN'T NEEDED!?
How wonderfull and full of [..] that is.
when it doesn't suit your position, witnesses are a must... but when it does suit your position, witnesses are irrelivant?
there are several words in the english dictionairy that were made for such an occasions.
we call such people: hypocrites, frauds, cowards, dishones, inconsistant, corrupt ... EVIL !

Circular reasoning, like mentioned before, gets you to only one place: NOWHERE!
If you truely want to be taken serious, you must be consistent and hones.
you just to others, but also to yourself.
if you think witnesses are needed to proof something, then apply it to all... no exceptions!

 

[Inferno]

Oh, I did. It was the first time someone tossed a Bible at me. Nearly hit my nose, too! :lol:

 

[Lame Name Dame]

"I want you to tell me that it is possible to give life to a dead fly. I want you to tell me that it is possible to start from the elements of the periodic table and rebuild the structure of the DNA, the chromosomes, the cells, the tissues, the organic systems, ecosystems, etc. and don't tell me it's difficult because according to you and the others this has happened without the support of of any intelligent intervention."

edited for typo

 

[ShootMyMonkey]

"I want you to tell me that it is possible to give life to a dead fly. I want you to tell me that it is possible to start from the elements of the periodic table and rebuild the structure of the DNA, the chromosomes, the cells, the tissues, the organic systems, ecosystems, etc. and don't tell me it's difficult because according to you and the others this has happened without the support of of any intelligent intervention."

edited for typo

Dealing with those particular questions, you can find very good and straightforward explanations from good ol' cdk007 --

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtmbcfb_rdc

Best part that at least the stuff covered in the first video is not merely conjecture, but has actually almost entirely been experimentally verified... while the second part has certain components to it which have been verified experimentally (such as the evolution of various ribozymes).

 

[nemesiss]

if this doesn't cause you to face paln, creationist have accomplished at making your brain kill it self.

 

[australopithecus]

 

[WarK]

That must be a 10 on O'Reilly 's scale of stupidity.

 

[Laurens]

I wonder if they teach creationism in schools of fish...

 

[ShootMyMonkey]

Too bad it's not real, though. However, considering that it's Bill O'Reilly, I wouldn't put it past him.

It's actually part of a series of parody images from a Huffington Post comedy article about Other things Bill-O doesn't understand. Much in the same spirit as the "Can't Explain That" meme.

 

[Gnug215]

That must be a 10 on O'Reilly 's scale of stupidity.

Wark has the copyright for that scale!

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

I guess we can't see the truth because we don't have...





fisheye.

 

[Gekidami]

if this doesn't cause you to face paln, creationist have accomplished at making your brain kill it self.

Surely this is a shop... Right?

 

[Inferno]

Surely this is a shop... Right?

Too bad it's not real, though. However, considering that it's Bill O'Reilly, I wouldn't put it past him.

It's actually part of a series of parody images from a Huffington Post comedy article about Other things Bill-O doesn't understand. Much in the same spirit as the "Can't Explain That" meme.

Seems to be, yes.

 

[Laurens]

That must be a 10 on O'Reilly 's scale of stupidity.

Wark has the copyright for that scale!

So how does this scale work I'm guessing 0 = not stupid and 10 = stupid as hell?

So this would be a perfect 10 stupid which means the probability that it is down to sarcasm is less than 0.000000000000001?

 

[lordlandraid]

I've proposed that years ago. The standard reply is "But we don't need to have witnessed it, because we have the Bible. And we know the Bible is perfect because God said so. And we know he said so cuz it's in the Bible. And we know the Bible is perfect because..."
It just reveals their bias toward the Bible and against scientific evidence.

When someone says 'the bible is perfect,' I would recommend asking them to quote something from it. Ask for specifics of it's locations. Once you obtain the location and they quote something from it, just quote something evil from the same chapter since you can find something morally corrupt in just about every chapter of that 'holy book.' Did that to somebody not that long ago. They stopped throwing out bible quotes and just turned into a religious drone, losing their 'humble, passive aggressive' attitude they'd been maintaining for so long in the process. It's kind of hard to call the bible 'perfect' when you are throwing out quotes from every chapter that shows it's a monstrous tome of pure evil.

It was funny to watch him squirm. It was especially funny when I quoted Romans 1:24-32 at him, and he replied by quoting the same thing. Apparently he holds a version of the bible different from my own because where the quote I read was more specific to a couple groups, what he quoted back was far more generalized and raised 'the projected kill count' far higher.