Aliens and evolution

There are 20 comments on the Jun 19, 2012, Washington Times story titled Aliens and evolution. In it, Washington Times reports that:

DENTON, Texas, June 19, 2012 - Aliens are ingrained in our cultural psyche. They abound in books, movies, radio, and a thousand theories about the extra-terrestrial, little green men, UFO sightings, abductions, Area 51, and Roswell.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Washington Times.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#4323 Dec 9, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Well Poly, it comes down to this:
Skippy has posted well over 400 posts calling me a liar because I refuse to accept his claim that the moon landings were faked by NASA.
In fact, he started an ENTIRELY NEW thread just to keep insulting me.
So, to the question of "who cares?" I would say: "Anyone who respects the truth and rejects ignorant bullies."
Beyond a fabricated response , I have no belief you will admit your frailties. Or ever admit you were wrong.

Classic sign of a weakness that can only be overcome from within.

You are absolutely up for peer review here Nugget.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#4324 Dec 9, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Well Poly, it comes down to this:
Skippy has posted well over 400 posts calling me a liar because I refuse to accept his claim that the moon landings were faked by NASA.
As I read the early posts in this thread, Skippy objected to there having been landings on the moon by *aliens*. It seems clear to me that he did not pick up on the idea that *we* are the aliens you were referring to.

From what I can see, Skippy simply went off half-cocked when he thought you meant aliens *from a different solar system*. You then claimed he denied the moon landings, which he did not (only the landings on the moon by aliens) and then the fight degenerated into the question of whether we can be considered aliens when we visit the moon.

As to whether the *human* landings on the moon and the *human* probes to the planets can be considered *alien* landings and *alien* probes seems like a triviality that doesn't deserve the discussion of over 4000 posts.

Again, who cares?

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#4325 Dec 9, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
Sheesh. I can't believe so much time and energy has been wasted on the question of whether we are 'aliens' when we visit the moon. Really, who cares? It's a matter of definition.
For example, when India was a part of the English empire, would someone from India have been considered an alien in London? Yes, No, who cares?
Shut it. This funny.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#4326 Dec 9, 2012
Wait, wait,...I need a drink...

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#4327 Dec 9, 2012
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>By your reckoning some one from Hawaii, could not be from the USA because they are not close enough.
Again, you seem to think that PROXIMITY is more important that reality. And again you are WRONG.

Hawaii is a state. USA stands for "United _STATES_ of America". As such, someone from Hawaii is from the USA.

Someone from the Earth is FROM THE EARTH.

The "Moon" is not part of the Earth. If you are from the moon you are from.... wait for it...._the moon_.

The fact that the Moon is NEAR the Earth does not make the Moon PART OF the Earth.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#4328 Dec 9, 2012
nanoanomaly wrote:
Wait, wait,...I need a drink...
Barpretender get the little lady her drink, It's on me ...
And get me whiskey for my men and beer for the horses... And while you're at a cup of coffee.

\_/\_/(_)3 (_)3 c(_)

TY Mr. bar pretender.:)

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#4329 Dec 9, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> To a brainwashed believer like you it has some semblance of meaning ..
Yawn.

So, after losing the debate THREE TIMES already, you're stepping up to bat again by changing your mind again.

Okay, round 4.

I say:
There is a definition of "god".
That definition contains several key points.
The Pharaohs fit each of those key points perfectly.
Therefore the Pharaohs were gods.

Now you say:
But they weren't REAL gods.

And I say:
As opposed to which other gods? Which ones were real and which one's weren't real.

Then you say:
They ALL aren't real.

And I say:
So, a Pharaoh is _EXACTLY_ like EVERY SINGLE other example of gods they has ever been.

And you say:
No! They were fake.

And I reply:
You said they are ALL fake.

You:
They ARE!

Me:
So Pharaoh is the same.

You:
Exactly!

ME:
So Pharaoh is a god, like all the rest.

You:
Yes! No! I mean, I want to be right!

Me:
Then stop changing your mind.

You:
I never did.

Me:
Let's start round 5, then.

Go back to the top and read again.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#4330 Dec 9, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Beyond a fabricated response , I have no belief you will admit your frailties. Or ever admit you were wrong.
Classic sign of a weakness that can only be overcome from within.
You are absolutely up for peer review here Nugget.
This is funny coming from someone who JUST retracted their post in which they lost the debate simply because they realized that they had lost the debate.

You keep demanding that I admit I was wrong. About what?

We keep going back over the same points. My position has remained the same.

Yours keeps changing from agreeing with me to disagreeing with me and back again.

You think I'm wrong? Then point out the error. Here I'll lay it out for you AGAIN.

The dictionary has a clear definition of the word "god".
That definition accurately describes a Pharaoh.
Any sociologist, anthropologist or theologist studying ancient Egypt would agree that the term "god" applies to the Pharaohs.
The Pharaohs were, therefore, gods.
Their status as gods is AS VALID as any other "god" which has ever been labelled as such by anyone.

Ramses is just as much a god as Hirohito (to use YOUR example) or Thor (to use MY example).

Your insistence that Ramses doesn't count as a god because he was "fake" necessarily implies that there is a category of _REAL_ gods that _REALLY_ exist and are better examples of gods than Ramses.

Please give me three examples from that category.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#4331 Dec 9, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
As I read the early posts in this thread, Skippy objected to there having been landings on the moon by *aliens*. It seems clear to me that he did not pick up on the idea that *we* are the aliens you were referring to.
In his FIRST post, I agree.

However, by the time his 2nd post came it had been made clear.
By his 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, etc. It was ABUNDANTLY clear.
We're not THOUSANDS of posts in and your claim is that he _still_ doesn't get it?

No. He understands perfectly well. He just believes the moon landings were fake. Like lizards and Egypt and C-14.

He's a crazy person.
Again, who cares?
Well, you're here posting. So, you do.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#4332 Dec 9, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Yawn.
So, after losing the debate THREE TIMES already, you're stepping up to bat again by changing your mind again.
Okay, round 4.
I say:
There is a definition of "god".
That definition contains several key points.
The Pharaohs fit each of those key points perfectly.
Therefore the Pharaohs were gods.
Now you say:
But they weren't REAL gods.
And I say:
As opposed to which other gods? Which ones were real and which one's weren't real.
Then you say:
They ALL aren't real.
And I say:
So, a Pharaoh is _EXACTLY_ like EVERY SINGLE other example of gods they has ever been.
And you say:
No! They were fake.
And I reply:
You said they are ALL fake.
You:
They ARE!
Me:
So Pharaoh is the same.
You:
Exactly!
ME:
So Pharaoh is a god, like all the rest.
You:
Yes! No! I mean, I want to be right!
Me:
Then stop changing your mind.
You:
I never did.
Me:
Let's start round 5, then.
Go back to the top and read again.
Punks like you say all manner of stupidity.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#4333 Dec 9, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
This is funny coming from someone who JUST retracted their post in which they lost the debate simply because they realized that they had lost the debate.
You keep demanding that I admit I was wrong. About what?
We keep going back over the same points. My position has remained the same.
Yours keeps changing from agreeing with me to disagreeing with me and back again.
You think I'm wrong? Then point out the error. Here I'll lay it out for you AGAIN.
The dictionary has a clear definition of the word "god".
That definition accurately describes a Pharaoh.
Any sociologist, anthropologist or theologist studying ancient Egypt would agree that the term "god" applies to the Pharaohs.
The Pharaohs were, therefore, gods.
Their status as gods is AS VALID as any other "god" which has ever been labelled as such by anyone.
Ramses is just as much a god as Hirohito (to use YOUR example) or Thor (to use MY example).
Your insistence that Ramses doesn't count as a god because he was "fake" necessarily implies that there is a category of _REAL_ gods that _REALLY_ exist and are better examples of gods than Ramses.
Please give me three examples from that category.
You admitted to being a human pretzel, that enjoys a self satisfaction
that makes a sucking sound.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#4334 Dec 9, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
In his FIRST post, I agree.
However, by the time his 2nd post came it had been made clear.
By his 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, etc. It was ABUNDANTLY clear.
We're not THOUSANDS of posts in and your claim is that he _still_ doesn't get it?
No. He understands perfectly well. He just believes the moon landings were fake. Like lizards and Egypt and C-14.
He's a crazy person.
<quoted text>
Well, you're here posting. So, you do.
You want to pretend sane people argue forever over the validity of Egyptian gods or something? Get out of town nuttbag.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#4335 Dec 9, 2012
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>There are others ....
There are 57 other moons that
Ho ho ho, yes, I was actually aware of *other* moons around *other* planets. Thanks muchly.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#4336 Dec 9, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Do the world a favour and shut the f*ck up you rambling, lying sack of sh*t troll.
Hey Skip, why are you, a known and confirmed liar accusing other people of lying?
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
When he loses arguments he accuses you of stuff like denying the moon landings, denying that egypt exists, or in the case of Aura Mythra and others, Nuggin simples calls them a YEC. Ignorant troll with his troll sidekick Dude.
Yet despite my "trollish" nature, I can actually engage others when posting on this forum. Your approach is much more akin to Nelson Muntz.

Any time you like you can try addressing people's arguments. Don't keep criticizing from the sidelines just because you can't join in.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#4337 Dec 9, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
Property on the moon belongs to whoever can defend it; like everywhere else. Water exists on the lunar poles.
Good luck!
What for? The day your buddies start throwing money at NASA for more cosmological research will be the day that apples fall upwards.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#4338 Dec 9, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Beyond a fabricated response , I have no belief you will admit your frailties. Or ever admit you were wrong.
Classic sign of a weakness that can only be overcome from within.
You are absolutely up for peer review here Nugget.
So you're complaining that Nuggin won't admit to mistakes. While Skippy on the other hand has not admitted to a single mistake once at all ever, though he made many. And it's all recorded on this very thread, and been pointed out to him, you, and others, multiple times, often referencing the posts themselves and exactly where he went wrong.

But you give Skip a free pass?

Interesting.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#4339 Dec 9, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
As I read the early posts in this thread, Skippy objected to there having been landings on the moon by *aliens*. It seems clear to me that he did not pick up on the idea that *we* are the aliens you were referring to.
From what I can see, Skippy simply went off half-cocked when he thought you meant aliens *from a different solar system*. You then claimed he denied the moon landings, which he did not (only the landings on the moon by aliens) and then the fight degenerated into the question of whether we can be considered aliens when we visit the moon.
And Skips mistake was pointed out to him in *great detail*. Multiple times. He's still stuck on page 4 and has been ever since.

Our job when we come here is to eviscerate fundies and have them face reality, something which most of us here think is a worthy cause. Plus it's fun.

Although an atheist, Skippy IS a fundie. Unfortunately a few non-creo's saw the guff Skip was getting and got the wrong end of the stick and jumped to his defence, but without having experienced the rest of the thread to understand where this all developed. And the thread's carried on this way ever since.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#4340 Dec 9, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
You want to pretend sane people argue forever over the validity of Egyptian gods or something? Get out of town nuttbag.
Please, leave the irony meters to the fundies...

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#4341 Dec 9, 2012
The Dude wrote:
Our job when we come here is to eviscerate fundies and have them face reality, something which most of us here think is a worthy cause. Plus it's fun.
I'm going to go deal with the religious fundies....enjoy!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#4342 Dec 9, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going to go deal with the religious fundies....enjoy!
In that case Shoob's back, abusing Big Bang cosmology, math and quantum physics again:

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/T9J...

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 9 min James 238,119
News The rise of militant atheism (Sep '09) 32 min prophecydotorg 9,235
News Atheists' problem with the Bible (Sep '09) 1 hr prophecydotorg 7,407
News The Consequences of Atheism 3 hr QUITTNER Apr 26 2015 1,318
News Who is an atheist? (May '10) 4 hr Freebird USA 9,329
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 4 hr Zog Has-fallen 18,691
News Atheists open up: What they want you to know 22 hr Liam R will return 31
More from around the web