Intelligent Design and the Multiverse

Intelligent Design and the Multiverse

There are 113 comments on the Examiner.com story from Apr 8, 2014, titled Intelligent Design and the Multiverse. In it, Examiner.com reports that:

Unfortunately at the opposite end of the science and religion spectrum from our Intelligent Design proponents lay another group of people with preconceived notions of their own.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Examiner.com.

TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#81 May 10, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> That doesn't even begin the match the threat to you in the third angel's message: Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name." Revelation 14:9-11.
Apparently your mind is so troubled that you didn't noticed that I wrote completely nonsensical drivel to mimic your completely incomprehensible fantasies.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#82 May 10, 2014
The only answer my critics have to perfectly reasonable arguments is completely nonsensical drivel.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#83 May 10, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> These are my thoughts: http://everythingimportant.org/seventhdayAdve...

You are insane. Why on earth would I care what your "thoughts" are?

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#84 May 10, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> That doesn't even begin the match the threat to you in the third angel's message: Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name." Revelation 14:9-11.

Wow. You don't understand Revelation as well as a retarded squirrel. All this language is metaphorical.

You have never so much as read a scholarly book on the subject.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#85 May 11, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> A doctrine is most certainly spiritualism if it comes directly from Satan in the spirit of the first demon's message.
It is mere insanity to equate natural selection operating on random mutations with "spiritualism".

Having only a hammer in your mental toolbox, you attempt to turn everything into a nail.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#86 May 12, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
The only answer my critics have to perfectly reasonable arguments is completely nonsensical drivel.
Now all the world needs is for you to come up with a perfectly reasonable argument. Maybe when Jesus comes back, eh.

Since: Nov 07

St. James, NY

#87 May 12, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text>literally
You keep using that word. I no think it mean what you think it mean.
TurkanaBoy

Since: May 14

the Earth Clod

#88 May 12, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
The only answer my critics have to perfectly reasonable arguments is completely nonsensical drivel.
Well, all others here: read it and decide for yourself!
LOL!

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#89 May 12, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
The only answer my critics have to perfectly reasonable arguments is completely nonsensical drivel.
And empirical evidence of course.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#90 May 13, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
It is mere insanity to equate natural selection operating on random mutations with "spiritualism".
No. The insanity is to pretend that I equate natural selection with "spiritualism".

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#91 May 13, 2014
The record clearly shows that I equate Darwinism with the Darwinists' obsession with trash collection and a deceptive shell game with an insignificantly sized pea. http://everythingimportant.org/evolution/

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#92 May 13, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
And empirical evidence of course.
What empirical evidence shows that Shubert's number is not embarrassingly small?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#93 May 13, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
The record clearly shows that I equate Darwinism with the Darwinists' obsession with trash collection and a deceptive shell game with an insignificantly sized pea. http://everythingimportant.org/evolution/
Gibberish.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#94 May 13, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> What empirical evidence shows that Shubert's number is not embarrassingly small?
There is no empirical evidence to show that your package is not embarrassingly small.

Still waiting for you to refute us, Shoob.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#95 May 13, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> No. The insanity is to pretend that I equate natural selection with "spiritualism".

No one keeps up with what you believe. We are more interested in reality.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#96 May 13, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> What empirical evidence shows that Shubert's number is not embarrassingly small?

Since it isn't a real thing it can be whatever you like.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#97 May 14, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> No. The insanity is to pretend that I equate natural selection with "spiritualism".
SInce the relevant contribution of Darwin was to show how random variation and natural selection could produce new species, and since you harp on about Darwin's "spiritualism" as if it materially affects his scientific theory, the assumption that you equate natural selection with spiritualism is consistent.

Or perhaps you are finally admitting in your characteristically hubristic manner that you made a dumb mistake.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#98 May 14, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
SInce the relevant contribution of Darwin was to show how random variation and natural selection could produce new species, and since you harp on about Darwin's "spiritualism" as if it materially affects his scientific theory, the assumption that you equate natural selection with spiritualism is consistent.
I am clearly on record equating progressive evolution with spiritualism: everythingimportant.org . And I cited powerful evidence proving that Darwin was a progressive evolutionist: everythingimportant.org/evolution/

Progressive evolution argues for the opposite of devolution theory. Regular mutation rates on virtually magical, inheritable DNA molecules and Shubert's number reveals that Darwin's contribution was an utter triviality.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#99 May 14, 2014
Devolutionists believe that Shubert's number is increasing over time. Darwinists believe that Shubert's number is a fundamental constant in nature but don't care to estimate it.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#100 May 14, 2014
Zog Has-fallen wrote:
<quoted text> I am clearly on record equating progressive evolution with spiritualism: everythingimportant.org . And I cited powerful evidence proving that Darwin was a progressive evolutionist: everythingimportant.org/evolution/
Progressive evolution argues for the opposite of devolution theory. Regular mutation rates on virtually magical, inheritable DNA molecules and Shubert's number reveals that Darwin's contribution was an utter triviality.

Yes, you are on record advocating all manor of nonsense. You are a broken toy.

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 Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 23 min dollarsbill 5,084
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 2 hr MIDutch 165,425
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 hr Bill Dunning 85,694
What's your religion? 3 hr MIDutch 191
Humans evolved from Canadians Sat Mystic science 1
Evolution of the Tennessean species Sat Mystic science 1
Experiment In Evolution, Genetic Algorithms and... Sat was auch immer 10
More from around the web