Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Will You Go on Record

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    As usual I see that you are "original".

    HINT: that stuff inside your skull (errr... assuming you've got one)
    may be used to originate/create ORIGINAL thoughts and, that way,
    you don't have to steal the material of other people.

    Try it, Santa Klaus ... it won't hurt.

    Jorge
    Not "original", huh?

    I'm just availing myself of your expertise in generating snarky content-less posts.

    Why should I re-invent the wheel?



    K54

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Jorge View Post
      Not "ALL" about the money - that's the part that I'm objecting to. If it were "ALL" then AiG would have suffered a quick death long ago. But I do agree that it became too much -- at least in appearance -- about money and "things". Not to my liking.
      I do give you points for at least acknowledging that under Ham the emphasis at AiG has shifted from being a ministry to making money. When I brought this up elsewhere all the YECs rallied in Ham's defense saying that they refused to believe the slanderous assertions made by liberal atheists[1] completely ignoring that they actually came from his fellow YECs who knew and worked with him for years.

      Just like it was his fellow YECs who permanently "disinvited" him from ever again speaking before the Board of Great Homeschool Conventions, Inc. for what they described as his "ungodly, and mean-spirited" behavior.

      Originally posted by Jorge View Post
      That said, I'll take a thousand Ken Hams or two thousand Kent Hovinds over ONE Kenneth Miller, Francis Collins, O-Mudd or - dare I say it? - you. No one of us is perfect but the ideological faults of Ham/Hovind don't even register on the radar when compared to the ideological faults of rabidly-militant Theistic Evolutionists.
      Because for folks like you being a YEC trumps all else and therefore there can be no greater sin than opposing YEC dogma.

      Originally posted by Jorge View Post
      Speaking of Hovind, he will be out in about one year His sentence was one of the greatest acts of injustice by a corrupt system that I have ever had the displeasure of witnessing. Many will be paying dearly for that act, if not in this life then in the afterlife.
      Thou shalt not punish a thief who acts like a complete ass in court if he is a YEC, eh Jorge.







      1. One, on a different subject, even gushes about "Christians serving the Lord Ken Ham."

      "The Lord Ken Ham"
      Last edited by rogue06; 09-18-2014, 07:30 PM.

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Jorge View Post
        Speaking of Hovind, he will be out in about one year His sentence was one of the greatest acts of injustice by a corrupt system that I have ever had the displeasure of witnessing. Many will be paying dearly for that act, if not in this life then in the afterlife.

        Jorge
        I wouldn't be surprised if Hovind's activities were given not nearly so much latitude in the future as they were in the past. In the first place, his track record for financial honesty is highly questionable. In the second place, he has never given the slightest indication that he learned a single thing from his experiences. I'd give him 2-3 years to be back in the slammer, for exactly the same crimes.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
          I do give you points for at least acknowledging that under Ham the emphasis at AiG has shifted from being a ministry to making money. When I brought this up elsewhere all the YECs rallied in Ham's defense saying that they refused to believe the slanderous assertions made by liberal atheists[1] completely ignoring that they actually came from his fellow YECs who knew and worked with him for years.
          I also used the words "too much" and "at least in appearance".
          How about ACCURATE, HONEST reporting for once in your life?



          Just like it was his fellow YECs who permanently "disinvited" him from ever again speaking before the Board of Great Homeschool Conventions, Inc. for what they described as his "ungodly, and mean-spirited" behavior.
          Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however wrong it may be. Kent did not pull any punches and called a spade a spade. Many people labeled him "un-Christian-like, ungodly, mean-spirited" and so on because of this. Me? I label Kent as an overall honest man of God - NOT a perfect man, mind you.


          Because for folks like you being a YEC trumps all else and therefore there can be no greater sin than opposing YEC dogma.
          As usual, you don't know what you're talking about but that doesn't stop you from viciously attacking.

          Thou shalt not punish a thief who acts like a complete ass in court if he is a YEC, eh Jorge.
          DITTO on my last sentence above.


          1. One, on a different subject, even gushes about "Christians serving the Lord Ken Ham."

          "The Lord Ken Ham"
          Don't know what that's about so I can't say one way or another.
          Regardless, there is but one LORD and it isn't Ham.

          Jorge

          Comment


          • Originally posted by phank View Post
            I wouldn't be surprised if Hovind's activities were given not nearly so much latitude in the future as they were in the past. In the first place, his track record for financial honesty is highly questionable. In the second place, he has never given the slightest indication that he learned a single thing from his experiences. I'd give him 2-3 years to be back in the slammer, for exactly the same crimes.
            You really - I mean REALLY - need to learn to keep your mouth shut when you don't know what you're talking about and/or when you can't force yourself to be HONEST about your opinion.

            Jorge

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Jorge View Post
              I also used the words "too much" and "at least in appearance".
              How about ACCURATE, HONEST reporting for once in your life?
              It's more than just an appearance. IIRC, AiG used to get very high marks from groups that oversaw religious organizations that took in contributions. That stopped abruptly after Ham started turning it away from being a ministry and into a money making venture.

              Originally posted by Jorge View Post
              Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however wrong it may be. Kent did not pull any punches and called a spade a spade. Many people labeled him "un-Christian-like, ungodly, mean-spirited" and so on because of this. Me? I label Kent as an overall honest man of God - NOT a perfect man, mind you.
              Or it could be that Ham is just a genuine nasty person. Many of his fellow YECs who have dealt with him have left with this impression. Honestly, I've never had any personal dealings with him so I can't say for sure one way or another.

              Originally posted by Jorge View Post
              As usual, you don't know what you're talking about but that doesn't stop you from viciously attacking.
              I've repeatedly provided evidence on how you abandon everything if it contradicts your cherished YEC beliefs. Whether it be the KJV or even a literal reading of the text that you usually are insisting upon.The instant they don't support a particular YEC view you quickly throw them under the bus. Everything is subordinate to the YEC outlook.

              Originally posted by Jorge View Post
              DITTO on my last sentence above.
              Hovind seemed to go out of his way to antagonize the judge at every turn. That is a sure way to get your sentence sharply increased.

              I was in traffic court once where some kid came in dressed in a filthy T-shirt, kept rolling his eyes and acting bored when the judge was talking to him, answered questions in an incredibly disrespectful tone and was shocked when the judge suspended his license for an offense that normally garnered a $100 fine or so.

              Originally posted by Jorge View Post
              Don't know what that's about so I can't say one way or another.
              Regardless, there is but one LORD and it isn't Ham.
              That is what I keep telling him. That a Christian has only one Lord and that is who we serve. He calls that bashing Ken Ham.
              Last edited by rogue06; 09-19-2014, 07:20 AM.

              I'm always still in trouble again

              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Roy View Post
                I'll take that bet too.Yup. If a bunch of mammal fossils were found in Precambrian rocks evolutionary theory would be in tatters.
                Frankly, in this event I think it would be the geology theory that would fall into question.

                Cheers -- sylas

                Comment


                • Originally posted by sylas View Post
                  Frankly, in this event I think it would be the geology theory that would fall into question.

                  Cheers -- sylas
                  That too, but I think if we found a modern mammal embedded in an unquestionably Precambrian strata (I don't mean something that had been washed down on top of it or something similar), it would pose a very serious challenge to evolutionary theory.

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    It's more than just an appearance. IIRC, AiG used to get very high marks from groups that oversaw religious organizations that took in contributions. That stopped abruptly after Ham started turning it away from being a ministry and into a money making venture.
                    Truthfully, do you have a comprehension disability? I HAVE ALREADY ACKNOWLEDGED that, IMO, it has gone "too far". I am objecting to your implication that it has become AiG's/Ham's ONLY goal - it hasn't.


                    Or it could be that Ham is just a genuine nasty person. Many of his fellow YECs who have dealt with him have left with this impression. Honestly, I've never had any personal dealings with him so I can't say for sure one way or another.
                    I was speaking of KENT HOVIND, not Ken Ham. Again, are you comprehension impaired?


                    I've repeatedly provided evidence on how you abandon everything if it contradicts your cherished YEC beliefs. Whether it be the KJV or even a literal reading of the text that you usually are insisting upon.The instant they don't support a particular YEC view you quickly throw them under the bus. Everything is subordinate to the YEC outlook.
                    You bring to my memory the old adage that people view the world as they view themselves... since YOU aren't intellectually honest then you see others (in this case me) as being the same.

                    The only things that I throw "under the bus" are those that do not square-up with the entirety of God's Word. And the reason that I subscribe to the A1611KJV is because many years of careful, intense study have proven to me beyond any doubt that this is the most reliable English translation that exists (note that I did not say "perfect"). I do not subscribe to the A1611KJV because I just 'feel like it' or any other capricious motive that you may wish to attach on me. Once again, try ACCURATE, HONEST reporting for once in your life.


                    Hovind seemed to go out of his way to antagonize the judge at every turn. That is a sure way to get your sentence sharply increased.
                    Were you at Hovind's hearing? I wasn't but I do know this: I know that Hovind had been targeted by local, State and Federal authorities for years before his tax case ever happened. Why? Because Hovind called out these crooks repeatedly on many of their criminal acts - acts that most people simply accept without any resistance. I'll bet you didn't know any of that, did you?

                    In case you didn't know (I'd bet you don't), governments are the #1 enemy of the people - just study your history, kiddo. Governments have exploited and oppressed people from the first moment that they were handed power. Our country's wise founders put the 2nd Amendment into our Constitution so that we the people would be able to defend ourselves against a government that went too far - exactly as what we have now. Of course, I don't expect you to know what I'm talking about. The point is that Hovind pulled no punches on this and got it right between the eyes from the thugs with badges.

                    I was in traffic court once where some kid came in dressed in a filthy T-shirt, kept rolling his eyes and acting bored when the judge was talking to him, answered questions in an incredibly disrespectful tone and was shocked when the judge suspended his license for an offense that normally garnered a $100 fine or so.
                    Fine, I've seen the same. Many judges literally act as if they were "God" - look at them the wrong way and they'll let you have it. None of this has anything to do with Hovind's case and the incredibly grave injustice perpetrated therein.


                    That is what I keep telling him. That a Christian has only one Lord and that is who we serve. He calls that bashing Ken Ham.
                    Maybe you ought to keep that in mind every time that you trash our LORD's Word so as to uphold Darwinism in whatever form you wish.

                    Jorge

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                      That too, but I think if we found a modern mammal embedded in an unquestionably Precambrian strata (I don't mean something that had been washed down on top of it or something similar), it would pose a very serious challenge to evolutionary theory.
                      "I'll take that bet too.Yup. If a bunch of mammal fossils were found in Precambrian rocks evolutionary theory would be in tatters."

                      I would bet the farm ten times over - make that one-hundred times over - that if any such thing were to ever happen, (1) it would be covered up or, (2) if it couldn't be covered up then one of the Evo-Faithful would concoct some 'just-so story' to save the day for Evolutionism.

                      Let us never forget the historical cases where this has already happened, my favorite example being E&G's Punctuated Equilibrium concoction. Nothing, n-o-t-h-i-n-g that is pulled out of the ground has a snowball's chance in Hell of disproving Evolutionism. As I have said a thousand times before, this isn't about empirical science, this is about ideological belief.

                      Jorge

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                        As I have said a thousand times before,

                        BWAAAAK!! BWAAAAK! buk buk buk BWAAAAAKK!


                        Jorge, what caused the formation of Barringer Meteor Create in Arizona?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                          ...
                          Maybe you ought to keep that in mind every time that you trash our LORD's Word so as to uphold Darwinism in whatever form you wish.

                          Jorge
                          Replace Darwinism with Jorgian YECism, and send it right back at'cha.

                          K%4

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by jordanriver View Post
                            Your side didn't roll over the minute somebody claimed human footprints with dinosaurs.

                            Yet you expect my side to accept a claim without question.
                            No, I don't. Nor does anything I have said in this thread indicate any such thing.

                            I would expect you to be initially skeptical; to demand full details; to wait for further investigation; to withhold judgment until a solid case was made. You could even refuse to accept any evidence until it was confirmed by the pope.

                            But that's irrelevant here, because the question is not the quality or authenticity of the evidence, but what that evidence consists of.

                            You asked those accepting evolution to go on record that finding a Cambrian rabbit would cause them to rethink their worldview. Many did, some with qualifications regarding species or number of 'rabbits'.
                            Not one chose to question the authenticity of the evidence; all answered on the understanding that it was genuine.

                            But when I ask you to go on record stating what evidence would cause you to rethink your worldview, you start querying whether the evidence is uncompelling, and whether it might be questionable. That's evasion.

                            sorry, but I don't trust the people on your side any more than you trust the people on my side.
                            This isn't a question of sides. It wouldn't matter whether the Cambrian rabbit was unearthed by Ken Ham, Ken Miller or Ken Dodd, the answer would be the same. Sure, if some-one like Kent Hovind made the claim there would be a lot more skepticism, but since we're talking about a genuine Cambrian rabbit here, not a shabby fraud, it would ultimately make no difference. But if you think the identity of the discoverer makes a difference to whether genuine evidence is acceptable, feel free to assume that any evidence has been personally unearthed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and verified by the chief rabbi, the council of elders of the United Church, the reincarnated souls of Ghandi and Mother Theresa, and whoever becomes the new global caliph.

                            So, for the final time, will you go on record as stating what genuine evidence, if any, would be necessary to cause you to rethink your beliefs?

                            Or will you continue to avoid doing what you request of others?

                            Roy
                            Last edited by Roy; 09-19-2014, 02:36 PM.
                            Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                            MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                            MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                            seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                              ...
                              Let us never forget the historical cases where this has already happened, my favorite example being E&G's Punctuated Equilibrium concoction. Nothing, n-o-t-h-i-n-g that is pulled out of the ground has a snowball's chance in Hell of disproving Evolutionism. As I have said a thousand times before, this isn't about empirical science, this is about ideological belief.

                              Jorge
                              Punk Eek is an explanation that fits the fossil record where long periods of stasis are interlaced with periods of "rapid" evolution.

                              What's the Jorgian YEC explanation for these observations?

                              K54

                              P.S. FYI, just in case y'all hadn't noticed, Jor's final sentence is an example of his mastery of projection.
                              Last edited by klaus54; 09-19-2014, 02:37 PM. Reason: fixed quote formatting

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Roy View Post
                                No, I don't. Nor does anything I have said in this thread indicate any such thing.

                                I would expect you to be initially skeptical; to demand full details; to wait for further investigation; to withhold judgment until a solid case was made. You could even refuse to accept any evidence until it was confirmed by the pope.

                                But that's irrelevant here, because the question is not the quality or authenticity of the evidence, but what that evidence consists of.

                                You asked those accepting evolution to go on record that finding a Cambrian rabbit would cause them to rethink their worldview. Many did, some with qualifications regarding species or number of 'rabbits'.
                                Not one chose to question the authenticity of the evidence; all answered on the understanding that it was genuine.

                                But when I ask you to go on record stating what evidence would cause you to rethink your worldview, you start querying whether the evidence is uncompelling, and whether it might be questionable. That's evasion.

                                This isn't a question of sides. It wouldn't matter whether the Cambrian rabbit was unearthed by Ken Ham, Ken Miller or Ken Dodd, the answer would be the same. Sure, if some-one like Kent Hovind made the claim there would be a lot more skepticism, but since we're talking about a genuine Cambrian rabbit here, not a shabby fraud, it would ultimately make no difference. But if you think the identity of the discoverer makes a difference to whether genuine evidence is acceptable, feel free to assume that any evidence has been personally unearthed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and verified by the chief rabbi, the council of elders of the United Church, the reincarnated souls of Ghandi and Mother Theresa, and whoever becomes the new global caliph.

                                So, for the final time, will you go on record as stating what genuine evidence, if any, would be necessary to cause you to rethink your beliefs?

                                Or will you continue to avoid doing what you request of others?

                                Roy
                                the word "compelling" is SUFFICIENT.

                                IF the any evidence convinced me Jesus never ascended to 'Heaven',
                                then why would I bother with the Bible anymore.

                                I could just go back to where I left off and assume my 'born-again' event was just some delusion.
                                To say that crony capitalism is not true/free market capitalism, is like saying a grand slam is not true baseball, or like saying scoring a touchdown is not true American football ...Stefan Mykhaylo D

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                                48 responses
                                136 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                                16 responses
                                74 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X