It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in evolution debate

[The Dude]

http://lolgod.blogspot.com/

Me like.

[Lil Ticked]

Okay, that is it. I can't take it anymore. I am switching sides.The evolutionists and their little gangbang on the IDers is turning into a messy Bukkake of logic onto the faces of the IDers , leaving them in prudish confusion. Someone has to stand up and turn of the camera before they drown or before this "debate" turn into a bad german video.
Thanks. Now I got to go read the crazy person ID crap and try to figure out a way to make it appear plausible. My head is starting to hurt already.
I guess that I should invest in a face mask.

[Christopher Pearsoll]

Lil Ticked wrote:

Okay, that is it. I can't take it anymore. I am switching sides.The evolutionists and their little gangbang on the IDers is turning into a messy Bukkake of logic onto the faces of the IDers , leaving them in prudish confusion. Someone has to stand up and turn of the camera before they drown or before this "debate" turn into a bad german video.
Thanks. Now I got to go read the crazy person ID crap and try to figure out a way to make it appear plausible. My head is starting to hurt already.
I guess that I should invest in a face mask.

How often do you see, even in jest, someone switch from the winning team to the losing team just in an effort to keep it competative?

Really my friend, you should just let the rats on that sinking ship drown.

[Lil Ticked]

Christopher Pearsoll wrote:

<quoted text>
How often do you see, even in jest, someone switch from the winning team to the losing team just in an effort to keep it competative?
Really my friend, you should just let the rats on that sinking ship drown.

You got a point. I am having a difficult time trying to make their so called "research" and "evidence" make any logical sense. I am goig to take some advil and try and wade through their B.S. one last time.

[Lil Ticked]

Christopher Pearsoll wrote:

<quoted text>
How often do you see, even in jest, someone switch from the winning team to the losing team just in an effort to keep it competative?
Really my friend, you should just let the rats on that sinking ship drown.

I will admit that it is not seen very often but, it is a habit that I got into on the religious threads. I have found that when I attempt to see things from another's point of view that my view of them tends to soften a little. That is probably how I went from born-againer to agnostic. So far all this attempt is doing is making me sick to my stomache and making my head ache worse. The sheer ignorance and denial of evidence is astounding. I give up. Bash away. If you want I got an aluminum baseball bat you could borrow to try and beat some sense into these people.

[Airbear21]

I have some interesting questions, if humans are merely the product of chance chemical reactions and nothing more than a sack of molecules than why are we born with a since of right and wrong? Why do we feel better when we tell the truth after we lie? Why do we feel bad when we steal? And most of all why do we Love and not simply lust, after all wouldn’t we make more babies if all we were after was sex with? Evolutionarily speaking I don’t think we should care about any of these things, yet we do, its what makes us unique. I’m not trying to make a case against evolution; I’m just saying I believe we are more than a sack of molecules.

[Lil Ticked]

Airbear21 wrote:

I have some interesting questions, if humans are merely the product of chance chemical reactions and nothing more than a sack of molecules than why are we born with a since of right and wrong? Why do we feel better when we tell the truth after we lie? Why do we feel bad when we steal? And most of all why do we Love and not simply lust, after all wouldn’t we make more babies if all we were after was sex with? Evolutionarily speaking I don’t think we should care about any of these things, yet we do, its what makes us unique. I’m not trying to make a case against evolution; I’m just saying I believe we are more than a sack of molecules.

A lot of the things that you stated are conducive to the propagation of the species or are learned behaviors. No one was born with the knowledge that stealing is wrong. Right and wrong are learned concepts.
So, now from evolution vs. ID to nature vs. nurture, yay.

[Goddess]

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>
I thought the Christian God killed all the others? Isn't that in some old obscure Jewish texts or something? I also heard that God had a missus.

I'm here, sweetie. I had to fetch another beer for you-know-who because he was laughing so hard at Tyler and Markie that he knocked the other one right off his recliner. Poor, overworked God.
No, hubby didn't kill all the others. They're partying on Uranus (say it out loud).:-)

[LMT]

Goddess wrote:

<quoted text>
They're partying on Uranus (say it out loud).:-)

"Every dingleberry is sacred..."

[Goddess]

And you can't find a good microbrew in Heaven. I had to go to The Other Place and barter for it. A few souls here, a few souls there. Satan kept trying to give me Michael Jackson, but I told him NO FRIGGIN' WAY!!! Not even his nose!!!

[Drew Smith]

Airbear21 wrote:

if humans are merely the product of chance chemical reactions and nothing more than a sack of molecules than why are we born with a since of right and wrong? Why do we feel better when we tell the truth after we lie? Why do we feel bad when we steal?

Because it provides overall survival value in a cooperative social species.

Airbear21 wrote:

And most of all why do we Love and not simply lust, after all wouldn’t we make more babies if all we were after was sex with?

Having more offspring isn't an especially good strategy if those offspring don't make it to adulthood. Pairbonding between the male and female keeps the male around to help in the raising of the child to adulthood. Even so, some men certainly do have sex with a woman and then abandon her to have sex with a different woman, which ends up producing more offspring. So in the human species, we can observe both strategies at work.

Airbear21 wrote:

I’m just saying I believe we are more than a sack of molecules.

We are. But evolution has never made a claim that any species is merely a "sack of molecules".

[Kevin]

This stupid thread has such an amazing life, I just can't resist doing my part to keep it going. In four short months, it will be a year old. Keep it going, dimwits.

[MIDutch]

Kevin wrote:

This stupid thread has such an amazing life, I just can't resist doing my part to keep it going. In four short months, it will be a year old. Keep it going, dimwits.

Well, stupidity is a fairly common commodity here in the United States. There is NO lack of people using a goat herder interpretation of a bronze age book of myth and fable as their chosen science textbook who assert that EVERYONE should be forced to become as ignorant as they are.

Those of us who prefer to live in the 21st century believe that battling ignorance is a worthwhile cause.

[Erasmus05]

Christopher Pearsoll wrote:

The way your typical cretenist (mis)interprets the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, snowflakes wouldn't be possible.

Not to mention that creationists wouldn't be possible given that a single fertilized could never develop into a creationist.

[Erasmus05]

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>
Best
Fstdt quote
EVER.

It could only be made better if creationists argued that thermodynamicists are sun worshippers which makes it a religion.

[15th Dalai Lama]

Kevin wrote:

This stupid thread has such an amazing life, I just can't resist doing my part to keep it going. In four short months, it will be a year old. Keep it going, dimwits.

We never tire of bringing people to Jesus.

http://www.landoverbaptist.net/PS3.htm

[Erasmus05]

Airbear21 wrote:

I have some interesting questions, if humans are merely the product of chance chemical reactions and nothing more than a sack of molecules than why are we born with a since of right and wrong?

Not one of us is claiming that "humans are merely the product of chance chemical reactions and nothing more than a sack of molecules". This is known as a strawman argument, a logical fallacy.

Secondly, it is only through evolution that we have a rational reason to claim that we have a reliable since of morality. Evolution is a non-random, non-chance process of trial and error. This means that our sense morality has stood the test of time and many rounds of testing. In fact, our species may not even exist without it.

Evolutionarily speaking I don’t think we should care about any of these things,

Why? We are a cooperative, social species that depends on empathy for social interaction. Our species would not be successful without our sense of morality, our ability to empathize, our ability to become emotionally attached to our life-mates, or our ability to sacrifice for the larger good. We can trust that these abilities are worthwhile because they have been kept by the process of evolution. We can trust them as much as we trust the beating or our heart or our immune systems ability to fight disease.

I’m not trying to make a case against evolution; I’m just saying I believe we are more than a sack of molecules.

None of believe we are JUST a sack of molecules, so why are you making such strange accusations?

[Kevin]

MIDutch wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, stupidity is a fairly common commodity here in the United States. There is NO lack of people using a goat herder interpretation of a bronze age book of myth and fable as their chosen science textbook who assert that EVERYONE should be forced to become as ignorant as they are.
Those of us who prefer to live in the 21st century believe that battling ignorance is a worthwhile cause.

Where did it all come from, oh Great 21st Century One? Seems like a simple enough question for a Great 21st Century One, don't you think?

[Chaz]

Kevin wrote:

<quoted text>
Where did it all come from, oh Great 21st Century One? Seems like a simple enough question for a Great 21st Century One, don't you think?

Not yet having an answer is both more intelligent, honest and useful than having the wrong answer.

And, let's face it, that's all you ever get from religion.

[Feklahr]

Kevin wrote:

<quoted text>
Where did it all come from, oh Great 21st Century One? Seems like a simple enough question for a Great 21st Century One, don't you think?

Ooooooooo...the old fundy "ace in the hole". When in doubt, ask about the origin of the universe and/or the meaning of life! It's as intellectually honest as bringing up "What's the sound of one hand clapping?" in a scientific debate.

Oh, and two sentences, two logical fallacies:

-Red herring

-Begging the question

Now, the answer(s)!

1. Science will find out before you idiot Bible-thumping, morally bankrupt, intellectually dishonest, lying-cheating-stealing-for-Je bus assclowns ever will.

2. Yes, I do think. Hopefully *you* will try it some time as well.