Another Idiot Debunks Evolution

[Apostate called Jimmy]

Only he doesn't call it intelligent design, instead he calls it "special creation". Link Here:

 

http://www.johnmuise.com/

[SWIM]

Only he doesn't call it intelligent design, instead he calls it "special creation". Link Here:

 

http://www.johnmuise.com/

 

 

AHHHH my eyes are burning... oh the stupid... it .. it... burns!

[LordofGondor]

Most people are taught in school, and from television shows and museums, that evolution explains our universe

Private Fucktard reporting for duty, sir.

[HuaiDan]

Better not disagree with him. He'll invade you.

[MonolithTMA]

I like the Free Hovind banner at the bottom. Hovind blatantly defies Christ's command to render unto Caesar what is Caesars and gets caught and sent to jail, but he should be freed. He wasn't just breaking the law for Jesus, he was breaking it in direct defiance of Jesus.

 

LordofGondor, that quote is where I stopped reading and started skimming. Anyone that thinks Evolution is an explanation of the whole universe clearly has not a clue.

[MathGeek]

I like the Free Hovind banner at the bottom. Hovind blatantly defies Christ's command to render unto Caesar what is Caesars and gets caught and sent to jail, but he should be freed. He wasn't just breaking the law for Jesus, he was breaking it in direct defiance of Jesus.

 

LordofGondor, that quote is where I stopped reading and started skimming. Anyone that thinks Evolution is an explanation of the whole universe clearly has not a clue.

 

I agree with you there, Monolith. From another fundie fuck on YouTube...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmdXjfdO5g0

 

This douche bag claims that evolution is an outright lie, and makes the claim that the Big Bang Theory was when "Let their be light" occurred.

In the other video, this reject then claims the Catholic Church is a church of idol and Satan Worship.

 

What gets me is that this dweeb didn't seem to realize that a Catholic priest and physicist first proposed the Big Bang Theory.

 

Man, even simple research is elusive to these dopes.

[MonolithTMA]

That speech synthesizer is painful to listen to.

 

 

What the idiot doesn't realize is that the cross is a graven image too.

[SWIM]

That speech synthesizer is painful to listen to.

 

 

What the idiot doesn't realize is that the cross is a graven image too.

 

 

The common held xtain defense of that is "we worship what it symbolizes, not the actual statue".

 

Well, that's just a total mis-understanding of graven images. They ALL are symbols, every one of them. So in reality, every cross is a graven image, just like every statue of mary.

[Ouroboros]

The common held xtain defense of that is "we worship what it symbolizes, not the actual statue".

 

Well, that's just a total mis-understanding of graven images. They ALL are symbols, every one of them. So in reality, every cross is a graven image, just like every statue of mary.

You're absolutely right, I heard once that it's how it works for tribal/native religions too. Like when someone takes a piece of wood and carve it and believe it's the wood spirit or such, it's actually a representation of the god they pray to, and not the god itself, because they know (as they reason) that the god they pray to cannot be encapsulated into a small statue, but that the statue is the link from man to god. Just like a cross... It represents the link to the Christian God.

[Amethyst]

The common held xtain defense of that is "we worship what it symbolizes, not the actual statue".

 

Well, that's just a total mis-understanding of graven images. They ALL are symbols, every one of them. So in reality, every cross is a graven image, just like every statue of mary.

 

Excellent point. I've always wondered about that. Would that also not make a Bible a graven image?

[SWIM]

The common held xtain defense of that is "we worship what it symbolizes, not the actual statue".

 

Well, that's just a total mis-understanding of graven images. They ALL are symbols, every one of them. So in reality, every cross is a graven image, just like every statue of mary.

 

Excellent point. I've always wondered about that. Would that also not make a Bible a graven image?

 

Sure, when it "becomes" more then a book, but more like a relic, or symbol, then yes, it is at the very heart of graven image worship.

[Guest Zenobia]

OMG..... what a good little Xtian Soldier *****shudder*****

 

This part made me gag:

 

“The complexity of eyes still argue for the reality of instantaneous formation by an incredibly intelligent designer, There is neither a fossil record showing that the eye evolved nor any testable observations explain how it could possible happen.†This statement by Bruce Malone shows just one example of the weakness of Evolution theory. Generally passed off with the popular scapegoat "the evidence is there we just have yet to find it" by the evolution theorists because they can’t explain it and they are just plain ignorant, it’s obvious the eye was designed."

 

????? So.... because the eye is complex, this proves it was created????? ??????

 

It's circular logic.

 

Complex things are created.

Eyes are complex

Thus eyes must be created.

 

DOH.....

[Taphophilia]

This is just freaking stupid. As if evolution is the only theory in science with the yet unexplained and gaps. As a matter of fact, every single theory in science has unexplained and gaps. You don't hear fundies ridiculing the teutonic plate theory or say "teutonic plate theorists". The fact that fundies seek to discredit only evolution theory and not any other theory in science proves that it's religion based.

[Brother Jeff]

We are not an accident. Evolution shows that we are the product of millions of years of biological evolution. Natural Selection is the opposite of random chance. These morons are completely clueless, and the saddest thing is that they are willfully ignorant. They aren't worth even one second of my time, nor are they worthy of ANY of my respect. They won't even do the most basic amount of research, which would show them how wrong they are!

[Apostate called Jimmy]

We are not an accident. Evolution shows that we are the product of millions of years of biological evolution. Natural Selection is the opposite of random chance. These morons are completely clueless, and the saddest thing is that they are willfully ignorant. They aren't worth even one second of my time, nor are they worthy of ANY of my respect. They won't even do the most basic amount of research, which would show them how wrong they are!

 

 

Amen to that. What I absolutely despise about assholes like these is that they don't even posses the basic layman's knowledge of evolution yet they think they can actually "rip the theory apart". Their delusions really know no boundaries.

[Jincks013]

One of the things that always annoys me about ninnys who bash evolution and try play the theory off as everything from the birth of the universe on down is this: they have no clue or are deliberately ignoring what evolution really is defined as; Evolution is a process that results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations.

Populations, Biology and last I heard the big bang was not a biological happening (That falls under the heading of physics) so to claim evolution created the universe, or to claim evolutionists think evolution created the universe, is clearly a sign that someone has not done their homework or is deliberately being obtuse.

[kozimoto]

I work as a research scientist (convergent evolution of methanogens, to be precise), and I can't tell you how many times at parties/functions/social things I get pinned down by some rabid fundy who presumes to tell me how my entire professional career is based on a "lie of satan" or whatever.

 

The worst is when I say that I am a scientist and they reply with, "So, you believe in evolution?!?" Arg!

 

I mean, where do you even start with them? They are so ignorant, deliberately ignorant, yet so fucking arrogant!

 

I used to snap their heads off in fury, now I just ask for their email and send them Kitzmiller v. Dover every day for a fortnight.

 

Hoorah!

[MonolithTMA]

The thing that bugs me is all the fundies who seem to think that all atheists have become so because of evolution. Evolution has absolutely nothing to do with my atheism. I fully believe that if an all powerful deity/creator exists that he could create the world however he wanted to. If a god existed I would have no problem with theistic evolution.

[Neon Genesis]

Yeah, I never understood that either, Monolith. Evolution actually had very little to do with my deconversion from Christianity and I didn't accept evolution until after I deconverted. I just don't get why they think evolution is somehow incompatible with the existence of God.

[Alan Bragg]

OMG..... what a good little Xtian Soldier *****shudder*****

 

This part made me gag:

 

“The complexity of eyes still argue for the reality of instantaneous formation by an incredibly intelligent designer, There is neither a fossil record showing that the eye evolved nor any testable observations explain how it could possible happen.†This statement by Bruce Malone shows just one example of the weakness of Evolution theory. Generally passed off with the popular scapegoat "the evidence is there we just have yet to find it" by the evolution theorists because they can’t explain it and they are just plain ignorant, it’s obvious the eye was designed."

 

????? So.... because the eye is complex, this proves it was created????? ??????

 

It's circular logic.

 

Complex things are created.

Eyes are complex

Thus eyes must be created.

 

DOH.....

 

Is the eye complex? It is compared to fecal matter, or stones, but it is only complex in terms of the fact that humans with machine have a hard time reproducing it. This means we have a harder time grasping the full nature of an eye than we have to rush off and atribute it to intelligent design.

 

Infact, the eye isn't that complex. It gives us an inverted image our brain has to fathom out, and we need two, spaced out, to get 3D imaging. Our brain does most of the work as far as selecting focal range and what to actually concentrate on. The eye is just a well trained but simple organ.

[Gobbler]

The truth is that god actually inspired the ancient prophet Isaiah to revel that our planet was a globe. The fact that our earth is a sphere was scientific knowledge that was far in advance of what the men living 2500 years ago actually knew. However, the prophet Isaiah wrote about god's creation of the sphere of the earth as follows: It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth , and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that strecheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in. Isaiah 40:22

 

The expression "the circle of the earth" clearly refers to the earth as a sphere or globe.

 

Well, why didn't god tell the rest of the church? As far as the interpretation of the circle being round like a ball instead of a flat circle. Obviously the early church did not catch onto this because of other verses stating the "four corners of the earth". There are still people today who believe the earth is flat.

 

When we explain to an atheist that it is impossible that the universe came into existence without a first cause--namely, God---they often reply "but who created God?" To this we answer, "God is a supernatural being existing outside the limitations of time and space in our universe." Obviously, nothing that exists within our universe of time and space could possibly create that universe.

 

To our claim that "nothing comes from nothing," an atheist often reply s that we claim God comes from nothing. However, this is not true. The bible does not claim that God came from nothing. The word of God declares that God has always existed, that He is an eternally existing being, without beginning or end. King David proclaimed the eternal nature of God: "Before the mountains were brought forth, or even thou hadst formed the Earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God" Psalm 90:2

 

The remarkable scientific discovery's during the last hundred years have proven that our universe had a definite beginning at the moment of creation and therefore, time, space, energy and matter all began at some definite point in the distant past as the Bible declared: "In the beginning god created the heavens and the earth" Genesis 1:1. Since time itself began at creation, we know that time cannot be infinite. Therefore, we can logically conclude that our universe, which exists in time, must have been created by God, who exists outside of the limitations of time and space.

 

The Bible has only one statement regarding those who maintain there is no God despite the overwhelming evidence that exists to anyone who is willing to consider it. King David wrote,

 

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good Psalm 14:1.

 

So what if this god is eternally existant outside of our "box" so to speak. Who says it's the Hebrew Demon War God of the bible? Because the bible says so? That seems to be their basic argument. For argument's sake let's say there is intellgient design. Why would something of that magnitude and fathomless intelligience need or desire worship? An entity that is eternally existant demands worship? Blood sacrifices from animals? Can't stand "sin" around him? Kills people in the OT for picking up sticks on the sabbath? That's what started my deconversion. It just didn't compute. Where does it say that god exists outside our own time and space of the universe?

[Guest Zenobia]

Kozimoto... I feel your pain. I worked as a journalist for years and would regularly be pinned down by fundies who accused me of being a member of the "mainstreamliberalpress." These guys hung on ever word Rush Limbaugh ever uttered... Forget that most media outlets are owned by corporations and if anything, have a conservative bias rather than liberal...

 

I once got into a heated arguement with Billy Graham's son about the Timothy McVeigh interview. He insisted that the media "had no right" to interview McVeigh and give the killer any air time. Forget first ammendment rights. Now I don't side by McVeigh by any means - he's just another extreme fundie in my book - but I do firmly believe the people have a right to know what he was thinking, so that we might be able to spot another lunatic in the making! But this guy was so totally arrogant. he didn't even listen to my position at all, just insisted that my whole career was basically a joke and everything I thought was eroneous.

 

Scary...

[MathGeek]

Before and "after" my deconversion, I still don't have the rudimentary knowledge to understand evolution in the slightest. As far I know, I've never been a part of any kind of controversy with this topic. As far as I understood it, evolution could have been part of a great plan of creation. Of course, I belonged to Roman Catholicism which isn't known for its "literal" interpretation of the Bible.

 

As far as I'm concerned, this debate is stupidly goofy. If some fundy wants to fill their child's head with such nonsense, let them do so because they are the ones who'll regret it later.

[Neon Genesis]

So what if this god is eternally existant outside of our "box" so to speak. Who says it's the Hebrew Demon War God of the bible? Because the bible says so? That seems to be their basic argument. For argument's sake let's say there is intellgient design. Why would something of that magnitude and fathomless intelligience need or desire worship? An entity that is eternally existant demands worship? Blood sacrifices from animals? Can't stand "sin" around him? Kills people in the OT for picking up sticks on the sabbath? That's what started my deconversion. It just didn't compute. Where does it say that god exists outside our own time and space of the universe?

And don't you love the double standards of their arguments? They claim to use the laws of logic and science in our universe to prove that God is real, yet we can't try to use those same laws of logic and science to disprove the existence of God? Because obviously the laws of logic can be used to prove the existence of an illogical being that doesn't abide by logic. Am I the only one confused by this here? Isn't that rather hypocritical of xtians that they decide when the laws of logic support their arguments whenever it's convenient for them but discard them when it's not? Either the laws of logic prove God or it doesn't. Xtians can't have their cake and it eat it, too.