- This topic is empty.
- Posts
what worries me…is that, your meant to be mocked or somethings wrong with your faith, because Jesus was mocked its considered quite the honor…??
I need to watch the clip…was just responding to the weird sense of senses that no doubt developed threw the justification of in-justification, the abuse an mistreatment of Jesus is twisted to nessasary an excepted 2000 years ago….
some how….the response is mean't to appear as if they are being….. rejected like Jesus…may I add..It is the sacrifice for that which never worked, an is work…
Its funny how the church creates problems, an draws holy self righteousness….to frustrated reactions…
Quote (Colter @ April 26 2012,02:50) Don McLeroy on “The Colbert Report” Colter
I couldn't watch it Colter..it was unavailable..have they removed it?
Quote (charity @ April 26 2012,22:48) Quote (Colter @ April 26 2012,02:50) Don McLeroy on “The Colbert Report” Colter
I couldn't watch it Colter..it was unavailable..have they removed it?
It still works for me so I don't know what the problem is. You could go to the main web site for the show “The Colbert Report” and search for the “Don McLeroy” interview. It's funney stuff.Colter
Quote (Colter @ April 27 2012,00:06) Quote (charity @ April 26 2012,22:48) Quote (Colter @ April 26 2012,02:50) Don McLeroy on “The Colbert Report” Colter
I couldn't watch it Colter..it was unavailable..have they removed it?
It still works for me so I don't know what the problem is. You could go to the main web site for the show “The Colbert Report” and search for the “Don McLeroy” interview. It's funney stuff.Colter
no, I tried two ways still can't watch it? smile so has it been removed or not? anyone?I just pulled it up again a couple of minutes ago.
They must have heard about you Charity and blocked your site because they were afraid.
Tim
Quote (TimothyVI @ April 27 2012,21:50) I just pulled it up again a couple of minutes ago. They must have heard about you Charity and blocked your site because they were afraid.
Tim
haha…An Im afraid that might not be quiet true Tim… NO go on my Apple!
Quote (Stu @ April 26 2012,21:41) Quote (Colter @ April 26 2012,02:50) Don McLeroy on “The Colbert Report” Colter
Excellent. It’s staggering how willing idiots are to be mocked to humiliation by satirists just for the free publicity. Yours is a wonderful and ridiculous country all at once. It was the first country to explicitly insist that religion and public politics be kept separate.The part about the economics of textbooks was very interesting, too.
Mr McLeroy’s more moronic comments:
Quote “Somebody’s got to stand up to the experts”.
Priceless.Quote “If you look at the complexity of a cell, I’m a skeptic”.
Just because you can’t believe it mate, doesn’t make a difference to the facts of how that complexity arose through natural processes. You are not a skeptic, skeptics insist on evidence. You are ignoring the evidence and giving us your confirmation bias version.Quote [ My personal scientific view is that dinosaurs walked with humans].
And Colbert’s personal view mocked this nonsense to smithereens.Quote Jonathan Edwards describes nothing as what a sleeping rock dreams of.
Wasn’t that Aristotle?Quote The bible explains that in the beginning god created the heavens and the earth.
ex•plain/ikˈsplān/
Verb:1.Make (an idea, situation, or problem) clear to someone by describing it in more detail or revealing relevant facts or ideas.
2.Account for (an action or event) by giving a reason as excuse or justification.The bible does not explain the creation of “the heaven and the earth”. At best it makes a bald assertion of it.
Quote We would have no reason to downplay Thomas Jefferson, a fellow religious conservative.
Jefferson may or may not have been religious and his own self-description was highly ambiguous; Christopher Hitchens became acquainted with Jefferson well enough to conclude that he was more atheist than deist, viewing as he did Jesus not as imbued with supernatural powers but as a moral teacher. Jefferson represented the political spectrum now claimed by the Democrats, so to call him a fellow religious conservative is hilarious.Stuart
Quote Just because you can’t believe it mate, doesn’t make a difference to the facts of how that complexity arose through natural processes. You are not a skeptic, skeptics insist on evidence. You are ignoring the evidence and giving us your confirmation bias version. Stu,
How can natural processes drive complexity? Does natural selection have foresight Stu? Does it?
This is hocus pocus voodoo science.You know what Stu, even your beloved Dawkins understands that evolution can never ever explain how life came to be in the first place…you do know this don't you? I heard him say it with my own ears buddy! I'm not talking about the material processes that evolution attempts to explain, but if you want to go there…explain the embedded information within cells! The laws, the rules, the back up information stored within cells which information itself is backed up by back up data, checked against, certified, monitored, policed etc etc etc.
Information itself that is not subject to natural processes, but information that enables and drives natural processes!!
Natural processes are subject to the embedded pre-programmed laws/data Stu!!
What do you think processes are?
Random mutations!!!!
Mutations aren't processes, they are mutations!!
And any mutations are checked before duplication, policed, detained, and deleted by the very processes which, complying with the pre-set laws dictating duplication, with their back up information which is backed up by the back up information backed up again, determine the outcome of any passed on information.Processes, Stu, are outcomes of set plans which lead to processes which climax in an event driven by foresight for a certain outcome with limited variations built in to cope with any external (environmental) influences.
THAT is NOT evolution.Processes dictate finite outcomes Stu.
That is, limited outcomes permissible by said laws whose alterations (adaptions) must also be checked, monitored, policed, against said pre-programmed laws embedded into the system before being okayed to be passed on!
Outcomes where errors are dealt with by system checks and balances and corrected promptly by helper cells who themselves are subject to checks and balances?
Are you even listening?
Do you even comprehend the implications?
Adaption is the allowable alterations built within pre-set rules of which any altered processes are subject to.So who put that information there in the first place Stu?
A cell is incredibly complex! Which is an understatement!And for a cell to survive, it requires many many many many many parts within said cell to all be present at “CONCEPTION” and working at the same time collectively just to have life.Every mechanism within a cell is needed for every other mechanism within that cell to survive…otherwise it would never be a cell, it would be a dead primordial cluster nothing.
How could all these multitude of mechanisms just evolve independently by chance when the cell can not even be what it is without its multitude of necessary mechanisms which make it what it is…a cell?
?
IMPOSSIBLE!! Voodoo science!!Forgetting for now that your beloved evolution can not even begin to explain this…Lets consider this:
Your evolutionist loonies say that the first cell, duplicated itself!
BUT…BUT…BUT…
It is now understood beyond doubt that duplication is ONLY POSSIBLE by it's inherent laws to come about by being itself being FIRST duplicated from a parent d
uplicator that can only duplicate by LAWS that were FIRST embedded within said cell…!!!In other words…THE LAWS/INFORMATION WERE FIRST…
Laws/information are NOT negotiable Stu…
Complex systems do NOT come about by first creating a system itself void of the laws it can not function without, nor ever come into existence without, the very laws which drive it and determine whether it comes about at all!!!!!
Because that would mean that the laws were in fact subservient to the processes of which it is not nor ever subject to in the first place!!!The INFORMATION/DATA/LAWS DEMAND IT!!!!
The very laws which are OUTSIDE/ABOVE/UNTOUCHABLE by natural processes ARE the driver buddy!!!!
The very laws that natural processes are SUBJECT/SUBSERVIENT TO…
Natural processes are the PASSENGERS!!!So, tell me, WHAT did the very first cell, OBEYING/GUIDED by the strict informational GUIDELINES/DATA/LAWS within it, which were BEFORE “it” and INSTRUCTED “it”…. “IT” itself duplicate from?
WHAT? Ad infinity recurring hocus pocus to the power of an innumerable mind boggling happenchance event of innumerable mutations occurring simultaneously within said cell and happening to be 100% interrelated and fully interdependent all for one or none at all by the power of infinity recurring this is the real evolutionary odds stretching credibility light years beyond that which light can conceivably travel voodoo Satanic athiestic gobbledegook passed off as science as we know it which was created by Christians in the first place while your atheist buddies were sacrificing their braincells on mundane tasks like determining if chance was a god after all bringing their atheism into question while they sacrificed their children in hope of a better harvest
?? GEEESH!!!!So now i can ask you too…WHO created your god buddy?
Quote (Devolution @ May 05 2012,07:48) Quote Just because you can’t believe it mate, doesn’t make a difference to the facts of how that complexity arose through natural processes. You are not a skeptic, skeptics insist on evidence. You are ignoring the evidence and giving us your confirmation bias version. Stu,
How can natural processes drive complexity? Does natural selection have foresight Stu? Does it?
This is hocus pocus voodoo science.
Natural selection has no foresight. It is a kneejerk reaction to environmental change, a forced cobbling together of solutions from components immediately to hand at the time. But it can produce complexity because advantageous mutations are conserved by the very thing that natural selection is: survival and reproduction of those fit to do so in that environment.Quote You know what Stu, even your beloved Dawkins understands that evolution can never ever explain how life came to be in the first place…you do know this don't you?
I guess you would be happy then if I said that even the bible never tries to claim that Jesus took off into the air like a helicopter to get up to the mount for his sermon. Why would you specifically mention this at all? Unless you have ambitions to be a lying cretin creationist instead of a moron creationist.Quote I heard him say it with my own ears buddy! I'm not talking about the material processes that evolution attempts to explain, but if you want to go there…explain the embedded information within cells! The laws, the rules, the back up information stored within cells which information itself is backed up by back up data, checked against, certified, monitored, policed etc etc etc.
Can you afford the tuition?Quote Information itself that is not subject to natural processes, but information that enables and drives natural processes!!
The information that drives natural processes is subject to natural processes.Quote Natural processes are subject to the embedded pre-programmed laws/data Stu!!
What pre-programmed laws?Quote What do you think processes are?
Random mutations!!!!
Mutations aren't processes, they are mutations!!
Given your appaling lack of basic biology I don't feel confident you are going to start making sense anytime soon.Quote And any mutations are checked before duplication, policed, detained, and deleted by the very processes which, complying with the pre-set laws dictating duplication, with their back up information which is backed up by the back up information backed up again, determine the outcome of any passed on information.
No, most mutations are neutral, entirely invisible to any of these. You do understand that any component of a living thing is basically the result of genes making proteins, and those genes are the things that are susceptible to mutation, right?There is no “official copy” of the genome, and indeed by the time you reach middle age there will only be a small fraction of your cells that contain the same code that would have been found in the fertilised egg that originally became you. Our bodies are full of mutations, and the mechanisms that keep their effects in check are themselves coded for in mutable DNA.
Quote Processes, Stu, are outcomes of set plans which lead to processes which climax in an event driven by foresight for a certain outcome with limited variations built in to cope with any external (environmental) influences.
THAT is NOT evolution.
I agree. So why did you mention it? The genome is not a plan. It is a recipe which has been found through survival and reproduction to work in the past, but it is still variable by embryological development and copying accidents in the genetic material.Quote Processes dictate finite outcomes Stu.
That is, limited outcomes permissible by said laws whose alterations (adaptions) must also be checked, monitored, policed, against said pre-programmed laws embedded into the system before being okayed to be passed on!
Outcomes where errors are dealt with by system checks and balances and corrected promptly by helper cells who themselves are subject to checks and balances?
Are you even listening?
Do you even comprehend the implications?
No, because you are not discussing biology. I'm not sure what you are raving on about.Helper cells?? You are too lazy to look up what they really are, too.
Quote Adaption is the allowable alterations built within pre-set rules of which any altered processes are subject to.
It's adaptation, not adaption. And the only criterion for the success of an adaptation is whether the organism that contains the adaptation can survive and reproduce, passing the adaptation on and increasing its frequency in the population, which is what evolution is.Quote So who put that information there in the first place Stu?
You mean what, don't you? Unless you intend to beg the question.Quote A cell is incredibly complex! Which is an understatement!And for a cell to survive, it requires many many many many many parts within said cell to all be present at “CONCEPTION” and working at the same time collectively just to have life.
Yes, that might be the first time you have said some
thing valid. And although progress of understanding has been rapid, I don't think yet we really appreciate just how complex cells are.Quote Every mechanism within a cell is needed for every other mechanism within that cell to survive…otherwise it would never be a cell, it would be a dead primordial cluster nothing.
How could all these multitude of mechanisms just evolve independently by chance when the cell can not even be what it is without its multitude of necessary mechanisms which make it what it is…a cell?? IMPOSSIBLE!! Voodoo science!!
I couldn't agree more. Intelligent Design creationism (which you decribe here) is indeed “voodoo science”, or worse.Quote Forgetting for now that your beloved evolution can not even begin to explain this…Lets consider this:
No, biologists have explained why ID is fatuous nonsense, in quite a lot of detail.Quote Your evolutionist loonies say that the first cell, duplicated itself!
And you think that less likely than the story of dirt being transformed into a man whose rib was converted into a woman who then had a conversation with a talking snake.Quote BUT…BUT…BUT…
It is now understood beyond doubt that duplication is ONLY POSSIBLE by it's inherent laws to come about by being itself being FIRST duplicated from a parent duplicator that can only duplicate by LAWS that were FIRST embedded within said cell…!!! In other words…THE LAWS/INFORMATION WERE FIRST…
Laws/information are NOT negotiable Stu…
Reference please.Quote WHAT? Ad infinity recurring hocus pocus to the power of an innumerable mind boggling happenchance event of innumerable mutations occurring simultaneously within said cell and happening to be 100% interrelated and fully interdependent all for one or none at all by the power of infinity recurring this is the real evolutionary odds stretching credibility light years beyond that which light can conceivably travel voodoo Satanic athiestic gobbledegook passed off as science as we know it which was created by Christians in the first place while your atheist buddies were sacrificing their braincells on mundane tasks like determining if chance was a god after all bringing their atheism into question while they sacrificed their children in hope of a better harvest ?? GEEESH!!!!
So maybe if we hadn't left it to christians in the first place…Anyway, you are wrong. The mutations didn't all happen at the same time. The beneficial ones accumulated over time and the detrimental ones either killed the organism they were in, or stopped them reproducing, or became infrequent in the population over time.
My favourite example of “irreducible complexity” being debunked (and indeed all such pin-up examples have been) is that of the flagellar motor. The ID claim is that all the pieces of the motor that drives the little tails of the species of bacterium that inhabits your dishcloth must have all come together at the same time, and the odds of that happening “by chance” are too low for it not to have been designed.
The problem is that if you know about how natural selection works you would think to look at other bacteria and see what components of the system they might have. And you know what? It turns out that the outer casing of the flagellar motor has a different job in a different species of bacterium, as a protein excretory system. So, even at the level of the components of the cell wall, Darwin was exactly right: natural selection finds whatever comes immediately to hand and adapts it to aid survival in a changing environment. Of course it doesn't do this by design, it does it by selecting by reproductive success from the variation already present in the population.
Quote So now i can ask you too…WHO created your god buddy?
Isn't that a question I should be asking you? I don't believe in gods. I have rejected all 10,000 gods invented by humans throughout history. Why you stopped rejecting gods after the 9999th one is beyond me.Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
