One reason some Atheists arecomplete ...

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#85 Aug 5, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
None of who give a flying fig about sad, little Eugene. Just like everyone else.
I have never met any of them personally, if that means so much to you. My purpose is in doing what God wants. And I expect to meet Him.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#86 Aug 5, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
Last time I checked your website, it was full of deceit, quote mines and lying.
You're talking about a faulty wiki quote at everythingimportant.org/devolution , which was correctly immediately. However, I'm talking about everythingimportant.org/ , which is primarily just a marvelous collection of powerful videos.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#88 Aug 5, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> You're talking about a faulty wiki quote at everythingimportant.org/devolution , which was correctly immediately. However, I'm talking about everythingimportant.org/ , which is primarily just a marvelous collection of powerful videos.

I could find nothing of value on that site. It appears to be composed by a narcissistic person with either Delusional Disorder (grandiose type) or mild Paranoid Schizophrenia. There is also evidence of OCD and there is no connection with empirical science. If you think that site is good you might be the author. No rational person could ever find anything of value there.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#89 Aug 5, 2014
Professor Noam Chomsky is one of the most-cited academics in the world. Google Scholar records 15,000 citations for the first five of his works it lists. Indisputably, Chomsky's political view is indispensable to the thesis at everythingimportant.org

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#90 Aug 6, 2014
This subject is unimportant but above all, off topic in this forum.
This forum is about evolution.
nothing worth while to discuss here.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#92 Aug 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
Professor Noam Chomsky is one of the most-cited academics in the world. Google Scholar records 15,000 citations for the first five of his works it lists. Indisputably, Chomsky's political view is indispensable to the thesis at everythingimportant.org
Strangely, there are zero, zip, nada citations for Eugene Shubert. Why is that, do you think?

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#93 Aug 6, 2014
MikeF wrote:
Strangely, there are zero, zip, nada citations for Eugene Shubert. Why is that, do you think?
You are laboring under a false belief. Immortality isn't achieved by received worldly recognition. Immortality is achieved by pleasing God.

My advise to you is to stop revering war criminals and start having reverence for God.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#94 Aug 6, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
This subject is unimportant but above all, off topic in this forum.
This forum is about evolution.
The favorite religion of evolutionary biologists impacts and colors their perceptions of science. This thread therefore is on topic.

For example: the conversion experience of Dr. John C. Sanford changed his perception of the fundamental axiom of evolution.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#95 Aug 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text>
You are laboring under a false belief. Immortality isn't achieved by received worldly recognition. Immortality is achieved by pleasing God.
My advise to you is to stop revering war criminals and start having reverence for God.
War criminals? You mean someone who would wipe out an entire planet? That type of criminal? No, I don't revere those who engage in mass murder. You do.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#96 Aug 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> The favorite religion of evolutionary biologists impacts and colors their perceptions of science. This thread therefore is on topic.
Since the majority of evolutionary scientists who espouse a religion are Christian, I assume that's who you are referring to.
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
For example: the conversion experience of Dr. John C. Sanford changed his perception of the fundamental axiom of evolution.
Figures you would gravitate to another nutcase. Birds of a feather and all that.

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#97 Aug 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> The favorite religion of evolutionary biologists impacts and colors their perceptions of science. This thread therefore is on topic.
For example: the conversion experience of Dr. John C. Sanford changed his perception of the fundamental axiom of evolution.
Sanford did not change anything in biology.
He is basically refuted until nothing was left of his ideas.
Sure he changed HIS perception of biology.
Nobody cares.

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#98 Aug 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> The favorite religion of evolutionary biologists impacts and colors their perceptions of science. This thread therefore is on topic.
For example: the conversion experience of Dr. John C. Sanford changed his perception of the fundamental axiom of evolution.
Evolution is not a religion, it is affirmed science.
Most christians affirm evolution.
Many biologists are believers too, yet they all affirm evolution.
Atheism is a world view.
Evolution theory is science.
Hence your crap is not only crap but also off topic.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#99 Aug 6, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Sanford did not change anything in biology.
He is basically refuted until nothing was left of his ideas.
Sure he changed HIS perception of biology.
Nobody cares.
I was greatly blessed by Sanford's fifth axiom and was very happy to see him warmly received by my former church. Furthermore, it doesn't matter that the majority of biologists don't see the significance of Sanford's universal empirical principle. What matters is that Sanford escaped the insanity that Sanford calls the Primary Axiom of evolution.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#100 Aug 6, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution is not a religion, it is affirmed science.
Most christians affirm evolution.
Many biologists are believers too, yet they all affirm evolution.
Atheism is a world view.
Evolution theory is science.
I am also an evolutionist. I also affirm Sanford's universal empirical principle, which is science.

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#101 Aug 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> I am also an evolutionist. I also affirm Sanford's universal empirical principle, which is science.
Sanford didn't affirm evolution because there is structural genetic entropy that makes evolution impossible. If you affirm Sanford, you are everything but an evolutionist.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#102 Aug 6, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Sanford didn't affirm evolution because there is structural genetic entropy that makes evolution impossible. If you affirm Sanford, you are everything but an evolutionist.
Shubie pushes *D*evolution. You know, Adam had perfect DNA, it's all down hill from there and all that crap.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#103 Aug 6, 2014
TurkanaBoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Sanford didn't affirm evolution because there is structural genetic entropy that makes evolution impossible. If you affirm Sanford, you are everything but an evolutionist.
Sanford affirms devolution, which is evolution in a direction opposite to the progressive evolution that Darwin believed.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#104 Aug 6, 2014
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Shubie pushes *D*evolution. You know, Adam had perfect DNA, it's all down hill from there and all that crap.
He's not the only one. The mathematics professor John Lennox also believes in quantum creationism because Genesis says that Adam came from dirt, not some primate.

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#105 Aug 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text>Sanford affirms devolution, which is evolution in a direction opposite to the progressive evolution that Darwin believed.
In other words, he denies evolution.

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#106 Aug 6, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> He's not the only one. The mathematics professor John Lennox also believes in quantum creationism because Genesis says that Adam came from dirt, not some primate.
Yes, professor Lennox should confine himself to mathematics and leave the biology to the biologists. But I never heard him talking about genetic entropy though, although it was the ongoing subject here. You just jump to and fro like a flea, as we all know, a very notorious habit of you.

As a matter of fact I think that professor Lennox should shut his mouth on evolution UNTIL he studies it and represents it properly. A person who distorts and misinterprets evolution to be a process of "pure blind random chance" is not entitled to assess it. Mainly because he actually IS not addressing it but his own devises of it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 29 min red and right 173,969
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 3 hr kenedy 143,947
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 14 hr Igor Trip 178,702
Science News NOT related to evolution (Jul '09) Wed macumazahn 1,248
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) Wed macumazahn 20,900
News Pastafarians rejoice! Deep sea creature floatin... Wed karl44 1
Satan's Lies and Scientist Guys (Sep '14) Wed dollarsbill 14
More from around the web