Send a Message
to Zog Has-fallen

Comments

2,182

Joined

Feb 21, 2014

Zog Has-fallen Profile

Recent Posts

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

And how far back in time does fossilized DNA go? And how is it not possible to interpret genetic patterns differently? And how is it that a probability of common descent being true doesn't imply a probability of common descent being false? Hasn't it occurred to you that the negation of the Common descent postulate is also perfectly consistent with all the other postulates of Darwinism?  (15 hrs ago | post #19484)

Seventh-day Adventist

A warning to all who slander Ernie Knoll, the messages, o...

The most reasonable hypothesis, of course, is that he has made them up.  (Yesterday | post #37)

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

So you don't trust your own critical judgment and experience. It has to be validated by a peer-reviewed journal?  (Yesterday | post #19472)

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

How fortunate for me that I did prove it to myself. Perhaps you shouldn't despise my proof and seek your own evidence and unquestionably genuine experience for your own personal proof?  (Yesterday | post #19471)

Evolution Debate

The Definition of a Creationist Scientist

Your ability to copy and paste well-rehearsed talking points doesn't impress me. The only scientifically admissible rebuttal to my post is a scientific experiment that proves Darwin's Common descent postulate. Don't you understand the science? Have you done the experiment? Have you read any peer-reviewed paper that claims to have proven Darwin's Common descent postulate experimentally?  (Yesterday | post #3)

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

You haven't even thought it through. That's obviously not a method of arriving at supernatural revelation.  (Yesterday | post #19464)

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

I'm talking about unbelievably powerful dreams and visions. Please post a link of one from a reliable source that proves that Mohammed is credible. http://everythingi mportant.org/Zog-H as-fallen  (Yesterday | post #19463)

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

Dawkins accepts having a superficial faith in the Common descent postulate so we should at least agree that he isn't consistent. http://www.topix.c om/forum/news/evol ution/T7BL607Q5N4J KRNEC  (Yesterday | post #19462)

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

Your reasoning is flawed. See http://www.topix.c om/forum/news/evol ution/T7BL607Q5N4J KRNEC  (Yesterday | post #19461)

Evolution Debate

The Definition of a Creationist Scientist

Your reasoning is flawed. Regarding Darwinism, creationist scientists accept all the established science that has been confirmed by the scientific method but are distinguished by their denial of the popular myth that Darwin's Common descent postulate has been proven to be fact by the scientific method. Creationist scientists are obviously on side of popular claims needing to be validated by experiments. The Common descent postulate is still a postulate and remains a question of faith.  (Yesterday | post #1)

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

Yes, and his refusal is an arbitrary choice. And that choice is to believe in God's nonexistence. And the reality is that there is no scientific evidence one way or the other for a valid proof of God. For me personally however, I have to accept my personal experiences with visions, which have communicated supernatural revelation, as a sufficient reason to believe in God.  (Yesterday | post #19458)

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

You stated: "Statisticall y, the number of creationists qualified in biological sciences is less than the number with severe mental disturbances. " I asked for your empirical proof that validates your statistic. You obviously don't have one. End of story.  (Saturday | post #19410)

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

What well-evidenced science am I unwilling to accept? I accept that evolution occurs. What more should you expect from me? I am very selective of the conspiracy theories that I accept. Which conspiracy theories do I embrace that are not supported by highly credible scientists? Frankly, I can't imagine anyone not being entertained by Dr Niels Harrit in the funniest denial of science and reason that I have ever heard: https://www.youtub e.com/watch?v=Whli 3O9M7Jw  (Saturday | post #19409)

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

That wasn't my claim. Since you are incapable of representing me fairly, then just quote me accurately. I asserted that everyone is religious and that only fools deny it.  (Saturday | post #19408)

Evolution Debate

"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

Upon close examination, Richard Dawkins is a terribly depressing religious fanatic. His religion is atheism.  (Saturday | post #19407)