Who's lying now?

[deluxe]

Ok, say for the sake of argument we accept this nonsense premise. Now, evidence for this creator being the God of the Bible?

Now that is a good question. You have to prove it to yourself using the scientific creed. Prove it and go where the evidence takes you.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

Ok, say for the sake of argument we accept this nonsense premise. Now, evidence for this creator being the God of the Bible?

Now that is a good question. You have to prove it to yourself using the scientific creed. Prove it and go where the evidence takes you.

Do that for us.

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

Ok, say for the sake of argument we accept this nonsense premise. Now, evidence for this creator being the God of the Bible?

Now that is a good question. You have to prove it to yourself using the scientific creed. Prove it and go where the evidence takes you.

Hey, kid. He asked YOU, repeat, ]---->YOU<---[/b], for the evidence. You're the one making the claim. SHOW THE EVIDENCE.

 

[australopithecus]

Now that is a good question. You have to prove it to yourself using the scientific creed. Prove it and go where the evidence takes you.

As has been pointed out, I asked YOU. YOU are making the claim, therefore you provide the evidence for it.

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Actually, morality has quite a bit to do with evolution. Our brains probably evolved to their current size to keep track of favors, such as who owed each other food and such. Morality is mostly about survival issues and ties in neatly with evolution.

Did you notice you said probable 'evolved ' this is an assumption, that we 'evolved'. If we 'evolved' there would be no need for morality. We would just need bigger teeth and more speed. Don't say we are smarter now, becasue with our intelligence, we are going bring everything down, how smart is that?
So morality came from creation. It is built into us. It needs a God to be effective. But it can be eroded.

Hmmm - not really. Morality is another way of solving a problem, a better solution then infighting among a species. Consider a pack of wolves, or a horde of piranha. They get more food out of cooperating to take down larger animals then they would feuding with each other. This is the basis for morality, and we can see it in dozens of non-human species.

Bringing everything down? You'll need to supply evidence for that. Like I said in the second part of my post, things are better right now then they have been for most of human history.

 

[Gnug215]

The equation is wrong, If go by the evidence
For the scientists it is 0+0=1.
The start to life is 0
'evoluiotn' is 0
but the scientists say both of these 0's equal a positive result.

No, deluxe. That is all in your head.

Now instead of ignoring my question to you, could you please stop being so inconciderate and actually respond to what I asked you?

20 people are telling you that you are wrong about evolution, based on what you've said (among other) about the Crocoduck.

Are you just going to ignore this and pretend you actually understand it, or are you going to be a reasonable person and ask for an explanation as to why you're wrong?

 

[Anachronous Rex]

Of course he will not. A more clear example of Dunning-Kruger I have scarcely seen.

 

[Inferno]

How about an end-thread? This has been going on for longer than the dotoree thread and it's deteriorating into name calling.

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

Provide the evidence, deluxe.

You see, evidence in science is a fantastic thing - because, in science, your belief in something is not a mechanism required for it's benefit or examination! Wiccans, Buddhists, Muslims, and Christians alike can have vaccines and talk on the internet and cell phones, as well as use vaccines and take anti-viral medications!

So, do provide us the evidence for the Theory of Creation deluxe.

Go on now - it should be cake for you.

 

[deluxe]

Hmmm - not really. Morality is another way of solving a problem, a better solution then infighting among a species. Consider a pack of wolves, or a horde of piranha. They get more food out of cooperating to take down larger animals then they would feuding with each other. This is the basis for morality, and we can see it in dozens of non-human species.

Bringing everything down? You'll need to supply evidence for that. Like I said in the second part of my post, things are better right now then they have been for most of human history.

What you have mentioned here instinct .

Dogs are in pacts because that was programed into them.The feuding at the end was dominance in the pacts.It kept the strong and leaders well feed. Morality is totally different than that.
We are born with a sense of justice. Kids will be the first ones to say that is not fair. But wolves do not care about that, the dominant ones get to be first and take all they can.

 

[australopithecus]

Still waiting for evidence of the Christian god...

 

[Prolescum]

Someone ought to take this thread out behind the garden shed and shoot it in the back of the skull. It's the only humane thing to do.

 

[australopithecus]

If we contain the bollocks here it won't spread.

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

If we contain the bollocks here it won't spread.

Do you mean like some kind of mind virus? Metaphorically speaking of course.

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Hmmm - not really. Morality is another way of solving a problem, a better solution then infighting among a species. Consider a pack of wolves, or a horde of piranha. They get more food out of cooperating to take down larger animals then they would feuding with each other. This is the basis for morality, and we can see it in dozens of non-human species.

Bringing everything down? You'll need to supply evidence for that. Like I said in the second part of my post, things are better right now then they have been for most of human history.

What you have mentioned here instinct .

Dogs are in pacts because that was programed into them.The feuding at the end was dominance in the pacts.It kept the strong and leaders well feed. Morality is totally different than that.
We are born with a sense of justice. Kids will be the first ones to say that is not fair. But wolves do not care about that, the dominant ones get to be first and take all they can.

My comment is: yes.

You have a sense of justice - that's an instinct. It's an instinct just as much as pack behavior is for pack animals - making sure you get along with the group. And, honestly, tell me you haven't seen dominant humans taking all they can. In fact, it's Biblical; the Bible praises a monarchy and details with great pride all the wealth displayed by kings. Human morality is pack instinct, just evolved to be relevant to human concerns and brain power.

 

[WarK]

Don't lock it

50 pages of creationists' inability to read what they're told. 50 pages of them failing miserably at critical thinking. 50 pages of exemplary show of confirmation bias.

This thread is a great example of what creationism is all about: dishonesty and denial of reality fuelled by religious fundamentalism.

Deluxe has shown in this thread that he knows absolutely nothing about evolution nor biology. He hasn't given us a single coherent argument, let alone evidence. Yet, I bet he still thinks like he knows Theory of Evolution through and through, he really thinks how and why all the scientists got it wrong. As it's been mention here, it's a clear Dunnig-Kruger.

Deluxe,

you have provided NO coherent arguments and NO evidence.

Evolution is a fact.

There's no reason to believe your specific version of god.

Thank you for showing this so clearly.

 

[deluxe]

Deluxe,

you have provided NO coherent arguments and NO evidence.

Evolution is a fact.

There's no reason to believe your specific version of god.

Thank you for showing this so clearly.

Hey squawk did I not tell you how this would be.
It's not that scientist know, it's they don't want to know. That is why what they tell us is a deliberate lie, by many.

For the scientists this is like, believing in Santa Claus , they know he is not real, but they support it anyway.
Now some of you want me to show you the proof, of the God of the bible.
This topic was on the scientists lying to people, I showed that over an over again. But some here still do want to, get it.
So whats the point?
The first thing for the scientists for the support, of who God is, is that the evidence we have is that life was created.
So that means no abiogenesis and no 'evoluiton', just creation.

And we also went over the flood account. That supports the bible.
So we have already covered scientific evidence, that what the bible says is correct.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

And we also went over the flood account. That supports the bible.

You mean when we trounced your notion of a biblical flood with countless irrefutable facts which render the account impossible?

 

[Inferno]

Hey squawk did I not tell you how this would be.
It's not that scientist know, it's they don't want to know. That is why what they tell us is a deliberate lie, by many.

For the scientists this is like, believing in Santa Claus , they know he is not real, but they support it anyway.
Now some of you want me to show you the proof, of the God of the bible.
This topic was on the scientists lying to people, I showed that over an over again. But some here still do want to, get it.
So whats the point?
The first thing for the scientists for the support, of who God is, is that the evidence we have is that life was created.
So that means no abiogenesis and no 'evoluiton', just creation.

And we also went over the flood account. That supports the bible.
So we have already covered scientific evidence, that what the bible says is correct.

So you misquote scientists, you lie about the motives of scientists, you misrepresent data, you look away when real data is shown to you, you shut your eyes and ears when someone explains something, you don't accept that you're wrong even after you've been shown to be wrong more than a dozen times over the last 45 or so pages and you claim again and again that you understand evolution even though you make the most basic mistakes... and after all that, you claim that you're correct?

Where are those pigeons on the chess board? :facepalm:

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Hey squawk did I not tell you how this would be.
It's not that scientist know, it's they don't want to know. That is why what they tell us is a deliberate lie, by many.

For the scientists this is like, believing in Santa Claus , they know he is not real, but they support it anyway.
Now some of you want me to show you the proof, of the God of the bible.
This topic was on the scientists lying to people, I showed that over an over again. But some here still do want to, get it.
So whats the point?
The first thing for the scientists for the support, of who God is, is that the evidence we have is that life was created.
So that means no abiogenesis and no 'evoluiton', just creation.

And we also went over the flood account. That supports the bible.
So we have already covered scientific evidence, that what the bible says is correct.

This is getting ridiculous... deluxe, what the fuck do you think scientists do all day? Why do you think they amass giant student loan debt and spend a decade in school? Because they are just sitting around all day making things up?

Because I know what creationists do all day: ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOTHING. No research, no experiments, no nothing. Show me a creationist laboratory. Show me where there is a collection of creationist evidence and creation scientists running tests and doing experiments.