Stephen King: Universe 'Suggests Inte...

Stephen King: Universe 'Suggests Intelligent Design'

There are 455 comments on the Breitbart.com story from May 30, 2013, titled Stephen King: Universe 'Suggests Intelligent Design'. In it, Breitbart.com reports that:

Novelist Stephen King went on National Public Radio, of all places, and spoke openly about God and how he believed everything about the universe suggests it is a product of intelligent design.

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

First Prev
of 23
Next Last

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#445 Jun 25, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>No, reality and good common sense debunks the idea that the first man and woman were 80,000 years apart.
You do not understand what "Y-chromosome Adam" and "mitochondrial DNA Eve" are.

You can't win an argument by being ignorant.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#446 Jun 25, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>No, reality and good common sense debunks the idea that the first man and woman were 80,000 years apart.
Your "reality and good common sense" is that when it's convenient a day is 12 hours, a day is 24 hours, a day is a thousand years or a thousand years is a day, depending on who is asking what.
Mind your 9th commandment, Bonzo.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#449 Jun 25, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
From my understanding of scripture related to our beginning, I believe the heavens and the earth were created when God said for them to be what they are. The miracle of creation happened instantly the day our Creator said for it to be so.
Get them plank-like fingers out of your eyes and quit yelling "LALALALA..."

scripture
from Latin scriptura "a writing, character, inscription," from scriptus, past participle of scribere "write"

My posts say exactly and precisely what my posts say, right down to every letter, spacing, capitalization and punctuation mark.

In precisely the same way, the Bible only verifies that it contains words. A book cannot be used as a source to substantiate validate and legitimize its own claims.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#451 Jun 25, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>This one is the greatest , most read and most talked book of all time and we should be glad we have it. It is a treasure to know how things truly happened from the beginning.
People think the Odyssey, Macbeth and Gone with the Wind are great, but no sane person mistakes them for historical reality. How many believe that Washington actually chopped down a cherry tree or that Edison invented the first light bulb? Consensus among ignorami does not make fantasy a fact, no matter how many generations of rubes have contributed momentum to it.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#452 Jun 25, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
The universe may have began as a very small bit or seed and then it may have unfolded or unrolled or rolled out to become what it is. Everything branched out on waves like waves of an ocean and always going outward. This is how the scriptures explain the design of our cosmos and it did have a beginning when it all started with a Word from God.
Really lame description of what it would have been like.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#453 Jun 25, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>This one is the greatest , most read and most talked book of all time and we should be glad we have it. It is a treasure to know how things truly happened from the beginning.
If Shakespeare had written his plays the same time your bible was written, he'd hold the record of most read books of all time. Why do you not believe that Romeo and Juliet are real people?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#455 Jun 25, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>The Bible is a miracle in itself and there is no other book that ever comes close to even compare to it.
Well you are somewhat right.

It is incredibly flawed, filled with myths, bad morals, self contradictions, failed prophesies and still countless people think that it is the "Word of God".

What is it about this book that makes so many people so blind?

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#456 Jun 25, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>The Bible is a miracle in itself and there is no other book that ever comes close to even compare to it.
That is your opinion, and the opinion of many others who have also been led to believe it. Like tinea, it's nothing to boast about.
It is exactly, precisely and inseparably the same as the opinion held by every other religion of their respective books.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#457 Jun 25, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>The Bible is a miracle in itself and there is no other book that ever comes close to even compare to it.
So you have read no other books, that explains a lot.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#458 Jun 26, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>No, reality and good common sense debunks the idea that the first man and woman were 80,000 years apart.
That is simply because you do not understand that mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosome Adam were NOT the first woman and man or even the only ones at the time(s).

They were merely the only common unbroken male and female line for the human race, respectively. They are traceable by the lucky fact that while most of our genes mix on reproduction, the male Y chromosome is passed on un-mixed into male children, and the female mitochondrial DNA is also carried through the descendant line unmixed.

You need to step back and think for a minute to understand the implications of that. Remember that when a man has only daughters, his Y-chromosome line stops even though the rest of his genes are passed on. Likewise when a woman only has sons, her mitochondrial line stops at them because man never pass on their mitochondria (either to their daughters or their sons).

Going backwards, this logically means that these two special elements will eventually trace back to a single woman or man, but they need not have lived at the same time. Others living at the same time also passed on their (other) genes too.

It takes a bit of thought, but its brilliant science. And it has allowed us to track human migration patterns and other good stuff too.

And the evidence shows that they did not.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#459 Jun 26, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>The Bible is a miracle in itself and there is no other book that ever comes close to even compare to it.
The Greek and Roman classics were far better.

Well reasoned, insightful, brilliant, entertaining at times, even poetic. As history, Thucydides leaves the old Testament for dead and even Herodotus does better. The Iliad has better prose than anything in the Bible with the possible exception of the Psalms. As science and math, no contest. As philosophy, the Stoics and the Epicureans are to the OT as the OT is to a jungle witch doctor.

Read them some time. You might be surprised.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#460 Jun 26, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>The Bible is a miracle in itself and there is no other book that ever comes close to even compare to it.
Of course, 1.5 billion Muslims say exactly, and I mean exactly, the same thing about their book.

Any sane person can see you are both wrong.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#463 Jun 26, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
Evolutionist claim they have evidence that animals and plants have the same origins and that what makes things different is modification in successive generations. They claim all living things have survived by being able to vary in some way and to pass on advantages to succeeding generations. This change from one living form to another is said to be brought gradually through modifications in genes when one base is substituted for another. Evolutionist use this premise along with radiometric dating and certain fossil sequences to get their regression back to a age of their divergence from other existing living things that are said to be the same types. They suggest that modifications are mutations and that they provide a mechanism for dating events and regressing back at a fixed rate. Pedigree studies are accurate when measuring a rate of modification from one generation to the next and so they assume that they can count back and compare broad populatons of many generations with this tecnique. The idea that everything works at a fixed rate gives them their dates for events and this may be partly what is wrong when looking back to past ages. They see patterns and sequences in embryonic development among living forms as pointing to common ancestry, when in all reality a similar pattern points to common design.
We don't "claim" to have evidence. We DO have evidence. The neat thing about scientific evidence is that it does not go away and can be observed over and over again.

By the was scientists knew that the Earth was hundreds of millions of years old long before Darwin came along. In fact Noah's Ark had been debunked about 50 years before Darwin's time.

And homology can never be evidence for ID since there are far more intelligent ways to design some parts than the way that they are found. It can only be evidence for "Incompetent Design". It is evidence for evolution since it works on the concept of "good enough".

Seriously, let's see if you have any evidence for ID. I am betting at best all you can claim is "Incompetent Design".
UNH BERTHA

Suncook, NH

#465 Jan 28, 2015
Stephen King doesn't know any more than what he reads from scientists that we already know. He's not really at that smart. Also most his books had great ideas but they were already done by great thinkers. He isn't even all that original. Its a wonder he has got away with plagiarism. 1. Langoliers was basically a rip off of a old Twilight Zone episode with tid bits of other pop culture thrown in (not to mention the Velma Dinkly character), the REDRUM thing had already been done in an old black and white British movie in which a little girl writes REDRUM in the dust on a window so from outside her parents getting out of a car read MURDER from the driveway. On and on and on and on and on. Heck Even Schooby Doo had the evil clown thing and at the time the book IT was written there was both Spider monster movies and books and tons of stories about Clowns.. Nothing original. He even ripped off the Simpsons with Under The Dome. ha ha ha Stephen King is a hack that from what I heard has Body Oder... It's true most people I spoke to that have met him all say he smells like he never showers. Now he's trying to sound smart by ripping off Stephen Hawking.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#466 Jan 28, 2015
WTF?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 23
Next Last

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 min Into The Night 23,571
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 16 min It aint necessari... 216,904
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 34 min ChromiuMan 154,837
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr IB DaMann 48,837
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 9 hr One way or another 179,742
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 16 hr GoTrump 1,047
Evolution in action (May '16) Wed Thick cockney cha... 36
More from around the web