Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 38

Thread: AA lying general - Closed

  1. #1
    Dane Guest

    AA lying general - Closed

    http://www.4forums.com/political/sho...6&postcount=35


    and it also assumes that Creationists don't accept that changes in animals do take place from generation to generation based on environmental pressures. It is Rapid Adaptation that occurs naturally in Nature, not evolution
    Described is Natural Selection which is part of Evolution. Archangel is lying about what Evolution is.

  2. #2
    Dane Guest

    AA lying about the existence of Scientific Evidence

    http://www.4forums.com/political/sho...6&postcount=18
    What evos believe can only be proven through scientific insights on a universal level. And given all of that support system behind evo, you have no concrete absolute evidence to support any of your conclusions or assumptions.
    Scientific Journals carry lots of this evidence. Archangel is again lying.

  3. #3
    Dane Guest

    AA lying about peer review

    http://www.4forums.com/political/sho...9&postcount=72
    Peer Review regarding evolutionary science is nothing more that a group of fellow charlatans rubber stamping what another charlatan submitted for approval to further the scam and lie of evolutionary science for the unwashed masses whom they seek to con into accepting this false science.
    Clearly, peer-review is consistent through Science as it is an inherent part of the Scientific Method. Archangel is again lying.

  4. #4
    Dane Guest

    AA lying about the goal/purpose of Science

    http://www.4forums.com/political/sho...&postcount=199
    Just ask yourself if these other sciences claim their existence is based on the assumption that God doesn't exist. I mean, does the science of Germ Theory say that it ONLY exists because God doesn't? Of course not. If you and I debated the nuances of germ theory, would God ever come into the discussion? I think not as germ theory makes no claims about it existing because of or apart from God in any way.

    But you know as well as I do that the meat of every debate between evolutionists and Creationists is that evos claim the natural order of our evolution apart from any Creator and Creationists insist that life on Earth was intelligently designed and created by a Supreme Being. As is your usual tactic, you can now attempt to change the goal post of this debate but if you want to be honest then you know this to be the central difference between the two belief systems. One claims God created us, the other claims that no God had anything to do with our existence at all.
    Science, including Evolutionary Science, doesn't say anything about God being involved or not Archangel is again lying.

  5. #5
    Archangel Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Dane View Post
    http://www.4forums.com/political/sho...9&postcount=72
    Clearly, peer-review is consistent through Science as it is an inherent part of the Scientific Method. Archangel is again lying.
    So just because you insist that secular sciences evolutionary peer review is consistent, then it must be huh? And therefore I am lying? WOW, seriously dane, my brotha, how old are you? When every single assumed fact in evolution is left open to future interpretation, then nothing has been proven absolutely at all. So evolutionary peer review is nothing more than like minded evolutionists rubber stamping beliefs that they hope are true, or will someday be proven to be true. So it is you who is lying dane. Now put that in your pipe and smoke it.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    4,930
    Quote Originally Posted by Dane View Post
    Science, including Evolutionary Science, doesn't say anything about God being involved or not Archangel is again lying.
    Actually, the point of this forum is to have others back up accusations of lying, not to accuse others. If I read the admin's note correctly, that is.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
    Posts
    1,943
    Quote Originally Posted by Archangel View Post
    So just because you insist that secular sciences evolutionary peer review is consistent, then it must be huh? And therefore I am lying? WOW, seriously dane, my brotha, how old are you? When every single assumed fact in evolution is left open to future interpretation, then nothing has been proven absolutely at all. So evolutionary peer review is nothing more than like minded evolutionists rubber stamping beliefs that they hope are true, or will someday be proven to be true. So it is you who is lying dane. Now put that in your pipe and smoke it.
    Do you not see a problem with stating that virtually every natural scientist in the world, crossing all borders, races, and religions, are all part of some vast conspiracy? Since you are the one asserting that all practicing natural scientists are part of such a conspiracy (or, to use your words, are "rubber-stamping charlatans"), do you not think some evidence of such fraud on a global level should be provided by the one making such a claim?
    "Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
    Isaac Asimov

    "Truth, in matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived"
    Oscar Wilde

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
    Posts
    1,943
    Quote Originally Posted by Kronus View Post
    Actually, the point of this forum is to have others back up accusations of lying, not to accuse others. If I read the admin's note correctly, that is.
    Yeah, I think that was the idea. I warned admin he might not have enough bandwidth to support this forum
    "Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
    Isaac Asimov

    "Truth, in matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived"
    Oscar Wilde

  9. #9
    Archangel Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Dane View Post
    http://www.4forums.com/political/sho...&postcount=199
    Science, including Evolutionary Science, doesn't say anything about God being involved or not Archangel is again lying.
    I'll allow my response to TQ's Quoted post stand for itself Dane. You have posted my best evidence of why you're wrong on this claim. And by the way sonny boy, since when is a person sharing their opinion, a lie just because you disagree with it? Are you the be all and end all of all truth Dane? Is that what we're dealing with here? Has god come to dwell among us and He is called Dane now?

    Quote Originally Posted by T.Q
    Somehow you missed a main part of my reply. Let me repost it for you below:

    "There is no mention of a supreme being, either for or against. Just as there is no mention in the theory of gravity, atomic theory, germ theory, electromagnetic theory, or any other you care to mention. See how flimsy that point is?"

    Now, according to your POV above, that means the bible also opposes atomic theory (we'll have to tell Hiroshima and Nagasaki that they didn't actually get leveled, according to the bible), germ theory (next time you go in for surgery, tell the doctor not to bother sterilizing anything, as the bible is opposed to germs), the theory of gravity (step out a 10th story window why don't you? You won't fall, the bible opposes the theory of gravity), electromagntic theory (oops, there goes your vaunted light switch! The bible opposes them!).

    Care to try again?
    TQ, are you completely lacking all semblance of common sense? Just ask yourself if these other sciences claim their existence is based on the assumption that God doesn't exist. I mean, does the science of Germ Theory say that it ONLY exists because God doesn't? Of course not. If you and I debated the nuances of germ theory, would God ever come into the discussion? I think not as germ theory makes no claims about it existing because of or apart from God in any way.

    But you know as well as I do that the meat of every debate between evolutionists and Creationists is that evos claim the natural order of our evolution apart from any Creator and Creationists insist that life on Earth was intelligently designed and created by a Supreme Being. As is your usual tactic, you can now attempt to change the goal post of this debate but if you want to be honest then you know this to be the central difference between the two belief systems. One claims God created us, the other claims that no God had anything to do with our existence at all.

    So why are you attempting to either derail the debate or confuse it by bringing up an off topic tangent that you know has no real bearing in reality or in fact regarding what separates us as evolutionists and creationists?

    Why is it when you demand such accuracy from me and jump on me as a liar and a hoaxer if I dare post an inaccurate link, yet you will constantly ask inconsistent, off topic, irrelevant and inaccurate questions that you know make no sense at all in regard to the actual issue being debated, but are in fact nonsensical, if not unanswerable based on the original premise being discussed? Is this your HONEST attempt at getting at the real truth, or is it your attempt at taking control of the debate in a very dishonest way?

    Sadly I have learned that If I don't point these distortions out at the time, and just ignore your foolishness then you will automatically claim victory for posting this rubbish and accuse me of running away. So think about changing your level of accuracy and be more consistent in your reasoning and maybe we can stay on track and actually debate honestly in the future.

  10. #10
    Archangel Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Dane View Post
    http://www.4forums.com/political/sho...6&postcount=18
    Scientific Journals carry lots of this evidence. Archangel is again lying.
    If you were right Dane, it wouldn't be called the THEORY OF EVOLUTION. Get a grip and then get a clue. You're not making any sense.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
    Posts
    1,943
    Quote Originally Posted by Archangel View Post
    If you were right Dane, it wouldn't be called the THEORY OF EVOLUTION. Get a grip and then get a clue. You're not making any sense.
    Theory of Gravity
    Germ Theory
    Heliocentric Theory
    Atomic Theory
    Kinetic theory of gases
    Plate tectonics
    Catastrophe theory
    Category theory
    Chaos theory
    Graph theory
    Knot theory
    Number theory
    Probability theory
    Set theory
    Acoustic theory
    Antenna theory
    General relativity
    Special relativity
    Theory of relativity
    Quantum field theory

    and many others
    "Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
    Isaac Asimov

    "Truth, in matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived"
    Oscar Wilde

  12. #12
    Archangel Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Dane View Post
    http://www.4forums.com/political/sho...6&postcount=35


    Described is Natural Selection which is part of Evolution. Archangel is lying about what Evolution is.
    No dane, that is another unproven assumption. Don't you know the difference between a fact and a theory? And doesn't any of this conflict at all with your christianity which claims that God created all that is? How do you marry the two belief systems?

  13. #13
    Archangel Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by T.Q View Post
    Theory of Gravity
    Germ Theory
    Heliocentric Theory
    Atomic Theory
    Kinetic theory of gases
    Plate tectonics
    Catastrophe theory
    Category theory
    Chaos theory
    Graph theory
    Knot theory
    Number theory
    Probability theory
    Set theory
    Acoustic theory
    Antenna theory
    General relativity
    Special relativity
    Theory of relativity
    Quantum field theory

    and many others
    Thanks for proving my point. Do you know how many sciences that scienctists admits they haven't even scratched the surface of that are used to support the assumptions they make to support the THEORY OF EVOLUTION? It is all just one big guessing game based on unproven sciences that are melded together to support the same fairy tale. And we can start with most of the above mentioned studies.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
    Posts
    1,943
    [QUOTE=Archangel;302572]I'll allow my response to TQ's Quoted post stand for itself Dane. You have posted my best evidence of why you're wrong on this claim. And by the way sonny boy, since when is a person sharing their opinion, a lie just because you disagree with it? Are you the be all and end all of all truth Dane? Is that what we're dealing with here? Has god come to dwell among us and He is called Dane now?



    TQ, are you completely lacking all semblance of common sense?
    Not last time I checked. Of course, I'm not the one reposting a post that's a week or two old, which has nothing to do with the topic at hand, in a complete seperate forum.

    Just ask yourself if these other sciences claim their existence is based on the assumption that God doesn't exist.
    I'll just ask you: Name on science that claims its existence is based on the assumption that God doesn't exist. And I don't mean one that you think does.

    I mean, does the science of Germ Theory say that it ONLY exists because God doesn't?
    Nope

    Of course not.
    There may be hope for you yet!

    If you and I debated the nuances of germ theory, would God ever come into the discussion?
    More than likely not. OH MY GOD!! GERM THEORY MUST BE ATHEISTIC THEN!!!!

    I think not as germ theory makes no claims about it existing because of or apart from God in any way.
    So far, we agree.

    But you know as well as I do that the meat of every debate between evolutionists and Creationists is that evos claim the natural order of our evolution apart from any Creator
    No, no, no, no, NO! Why must you lie like this? The ToE does not, never has, and never will state anything for or against the existence of God. Many atheists may use it to justify their beliefs, but that does not mean that the ToE declares there is no god. Never has, never will. Nope, uh-uh, no way jose. How many times and ways can I say this? Here's a corelation for you: The KKK bases their beliefs on Christianity. That's where they get the support for their beliefs. Does that mean then that Christianity is a white supremacist religion? I think you and I can agree that this isn't the case.

    and Creationists insist that life on Earth was intelligently designed and created by a Supreme Being.
    Insist all you want. It's your right to believe it. It is not your right to insist that we all believe as you do.

    s is your usual tactic, you can now attempt to change the goal post of this debate but if you want to be honest then you know this to be the central difference between the two belief systems. One claims God created us, the other claims that no God had anything to do with our existence at all.
    Just to be clear, I in no way, shape or form agree with your strawman depiction of the ToE.

    So why are you attempting to either derail the debate or confuse it by bringing up an off topic tangent that you know has no real bearing in reality or in fact regarding what separates us as evolutionists and creationists?
    Let's have a little history here: You claimed the Bible explicity stated that God was against the ToE. I asked you to back it up by quoting from the bible. You accused me of being dishonest, because I knew very well that there was no such thing said in the bible. Well, DUH! That's why I asked you to support your assertion! You then said that because the bible didn't mention the ToE, that meant it was against it. At which point, I posted as quoted above, pointing out to you that none of these other theories were mentioned in the bible either. Now, please explain to me HOW THE HELL IT IS DISHONEST TO SHOW THAT YOU ARE A SIMPLETON!?! If your arguments are so laughably bad, it is not dishonest, nor is it an attack on you, to rip them to shreds by pointing out the inanity of them!


    Why is it when you demand such accuracy from me
    Such accuracy?!? I'm asking you to not post things that are false to support your position!!! It's basic common sense!!

    and jump on me as a liar and a hoaxer
    You are one! It's proven. The fact you don't recognize it speaks of serious cognitive dissonance.

    yet you will constantly ask inconsistent, off topic, irrelevant and inaccurate questions that you know make no sense at all in regard to the actual issue being debated, but are in fact nonsensical, if not unanswerable based on the original premise being discussed?
    I think anyone who reads the above post, with the supplied history, will see that this post was in no way nonsensical, irrelevant, or off topic. It accurately pointed out the considerable flaw in your argument.

    Is this your HONEST attempt at getting at the real truth, or is it your attempt at taking control of the debate in a very dishonest way?
    This is my HONEST attempt to make you realize that your argument was HONESTLY seriously flawed. IT IS NOT DISHONEST TO POINT OUT THE FLAWED ARGUMENTS YOU PRESENT!

    Sadly I have learned that If I don't point these distortions out at the time
    This was a distortion?

    , and just ignore your foolishness
    I agree, it was foolish, because I used YOUR logic to make my point.

    then you will automatically claim victory for posting this rubbish and accuse me of running away.
    When I post something that you can't respond to and you leave, HOW IS IT NOT RUNNING AWAY? Twice now, you have abandoned a thread at the exact same point in the discussion: Why does only one line in Leviticus still apply today? Why does the rest not when that one line does. Both times, you disappeared with no response (no adequate response anyways).

    So think about changing your level of accuracy
    Holy ####, do you ever have a lot of gall, telling me to be more accurate.

    and be more consistent in your reasoning and maybe we can stay on track and actually debate honestly in the future.
    You talking about reasoning and honesty has got to be the funniest thing I've read tonight.

    Was this the post I was supposed to remember where I was "being dishonest"?

    LMAO, come one, come all, see my dishonesty in action!
    "Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
    Isaac Asimov

    "Truth, in matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived"
    Oscar Wilde

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
    Posts
    1,943
    Quote Originally Posted by Archangel View Post
    Thanks for proving my point. Do you know how many sciences that scienctists admits they haven't even scratched the surface of that are used to support the assumptions they make to support the THEORY OF EVOLUTION? It is all just one big guessing game based on unproven sciences that are melded together to support the same fairy tale. And we can start with most of the above mentioned studies.
    You are of course aware that all science consists of theories. I know you are, as this has been explained to you countless times. The fact that you think it clever to pretend now that "theory" means "guess", as in layman's terms, shows really how infantile and idiotic you are. See my signature.
    "Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
    Isaac Asimov

    "Truth, in matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived"
    Oscar Wilde

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •