Celsus Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulgaris Prime Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 ...is that Dumbledore in the first panel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narcissist Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 mathematics - numerology medicine - homeopathy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hero of Hyrule Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 LOL good picture Here we already teach all theories but place them in a historic perspective. Nothing is forced out of schools, it's just presented as old theory wich makes it harder for creatinists to complain. They still complain though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Helmet Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 meteorology - sacrifices to the gods telecommuncations - telepathy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Neil Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 The Periodic Table - The Four Elements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlinfmct87 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 You're just persecuting wizards!!!! Merlin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Neil Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dianka Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Psychology - Scientology Wait, maybe that should be Scientology vs. Psychology Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel_1012 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Creation - As many years as you need for it to make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Creation - As many years as you need for it to make sense. Is that a stab at evolution? Are you issuing a challenge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodsmoke Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Hehehe, yet another zinger. Bruce, I do believe you're on a roll! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodsmoke Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Creation - As many years as you need for it to make sense. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> *sigh* Why am I not surprised the point of that comic seems to have gone right over your head? Either that or, in the time-honored tradition of willfully ignorant creationists everywhere, you simply ignored it. Don't bother, Asimov. This guy is on par with Goldy, except that trying to debate with him brings only the frustration and none of the comic relief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 *sigh* Why am I not surprised the point of that comic seems to have gone right over your head? Either that or, in the time-honored tradition of willfully ignorant creationists everywhere, you simply ignored it. Don't bother, Asimov. This guy is on par with Goldy, except that trying to debate with him brings only the frustration and none of the comic relief. If he has the cojones to take me or some other science educated person on, then I will gladly take the time to show how how little he knows. I have a lot of patience Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy-tiger Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Creation - As many years as you need for it to make sense. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No no no no no... What you should have put was this... Creation - Reality. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Or this... Creation - Science. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Or even... Creation - Fact. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> See how it all makes sense now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy-tiger Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 If he has the cojones to take me or some other science educated person on, then I will gladly take the time to show how how little he knows. I have a lot of patience <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Heh... he tried... See if you can guess the outcome... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vixentrox Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Maybe he should study alchemy and phrenology as many years at it takes to make sense.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saviourmachine Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 No no no no no...What you should have put was this... Ha ha, amazing that a xian was the first that saw this open door. And tried desperately to close it before us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel_1012 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 If he has the cojones to take me or some other science educated person on, then I will gladly take the time to show how how little he knows. I have a lot of patience <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Considering you have no proof for anything, then talk origins, break my faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel_1012 Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 *sigh* Why am I not surprised the point of that comic seems to have gone right over your head? Either that or, in the time-honored tradition of willfully ignorant creationists everywhere, you simply ignored it. Don't bother, Asimov. This guy is on par with Goldy, except that trying to debate with him brings only the frustration and none of the comic relief. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I both grasped, and noticed the point in the comic. It then used the fact that I had grasped and acknowledged its intent, to stab at the silly generally accepted idea of evolution... just as Asimov noticed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Neil Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 You know, I really hate to be the one to break this to you, but you're really not that bright. You know, any time you feel up to it, the debate forum is open. There's usually one evolution topic open at all times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted October 11, 2005 Share Posted October 11, 2005 Considering you have no proof for anything, then talk origins, break my faith. I challenge you to a formal debate, any reasonable topic in regards to Evolution and Creation. I will not use talkorigins.org in any of my references. I will allow you to choose the topic, however here are some that you might enjoy: Resolved: Is it reasonable to accept Evolution as a scientific theory? Resolved: Creationism vs. Evolution - which one is more reasonable and fact based? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy-tiger Posted October 12, 2005 Share Posted October 12, 2005 I both grasped, and noticed the point in the comic. It then used the fact that I had grasped and acknowledged its intent, to stab at the silly generally accepted idea of evolution... just as Asimov noticed. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How about taking a stab at the actual Theory of Evolution? 'Cos the "silly generally accepted" one that you are talking about just happens to be a Creationist strawman... I mean, what you gonna believe? The tons of evidence on one side showing that evolution is a fact, or the opposing argument that consists simply of "nope, you're wrong"? What am I saying?? Of course you're gonna believe the "nope, you're wrong" argument. If you didn't, you wouldn't be making your pathetic attacks on strawmen while doing your best to ignore reality... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest aexapo Posted October 12, 2005 Share Posted October 12, 2005 I both grasped, and noticed the point in the comic. It then used the fact that I had grasped and acknowledged its intent, to stab at the silly generally accepted idea of evolution... just as Asimov noticed. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree! Science doesn't have everything figured out, but they have some pretty good notions -- all based on things we do know and things we can make educated guesses about due to this prior knowledge. But, you're right -- perhaps both are simply "faith based," since neither had witnesses. Other similiarities include the fact that both scientific and biblical based ideas often come up short when new facts come along -- and they have to change their outlook sometimes. Where they differ is what's really interesting. Scientific assumptions usually only change when science proves it wrong . . . the change acknowledges the new science, and moves on. Throughout Christian history, Christian assumptions about the "way the world works" have systematically been proven wrong -- but not by new biblical revelations, but by SCIENCE. Grudgingly, they too have had to change their tune, to accomodate reality -- breathing huge sighs of relief that as of that day, although "faith" had been set back a notch, science still could not explain everything that there was to explain, so God must still be real. So, praise be, God is still God as long as things remain unexplainable -- although his kingdom gets smaller with each new scientific discovery. So, place your faith with the Benny Hinns and Pope Benedicts of the world -- I'll place mine with the discoverers of the solar system, the inventors of chemotherapy, physists, chemists, biologists, etc., etc. I'm sure that if 137 years from now, when science has finally explained EVERYTHING except the building material of quarks, that God will still be God, because we can't explain quarks. What happens 7 weeks, 3 days, four hours, three minutes, and forty-seven seconds later, though, when a grad student at the University of Moon-Base #4 discovers the final detail? What then? Will God still be God if he has nothing left to be responsible for? What would he be the God of? Serendipity? Coincidence? Romantic Love? Deja-Vu? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted October 12, 2005 Share Posted October 12, 2005 I challenge you to a formal debate, any reasonable topic in regards to Evolution and Creation. I will not use talkorigins.org in any of my references. I will allow you to choose the topic, however here are some that you might enjoy: Resolved: Is it reasonable to accept Evolution as a scientific theory? Resolved: Creationism vs. Evolution - which one is more reasonable and fact based? Hey, that's a good idea. You guys should take it to the real section of formal debate. We never use it, it would be cool to see one in action again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts