08-08-2007, 01:41 PM
|
#61
|
|
Guest
|
Hey, thanks for that post, Rhino. That is a really interesting article! And even a better case against xans.
|
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 02:12 PM
|
#62
|
|
Obsessed Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,279
|
Quote:
|
nkb wrote
Xans,
Can you please explain to us why you insist on using the term "cosmo-evolutionist"?
|
From now on I'll use the term "cosmic evolutionist".
However I'll be sure and use the term "cosmo-evolutionist" again, when relevant, when I see the term Christ-Puncher or it's ilk used in a thread.
Quote:
|
Do you admit that you made this term up (or picked it up from a theist website), and it is not used in any of the scientific fields?
|
Of course I made the term up. Google it, you should only see this forum listed. And it's not used in any scientific field but it's quite easy to understand it's meaning. I asked a complete stranger what he thought it meant and he was right on. There is no need to fake being obtuse just because you're offended by my term or some other reason.
Quote:
|
Is there a reason you do not want to use "cosmologist" or "astrophysicist" instead, which are widely used?
|
As a cosmic evolutionist and an atheist yourself, you make no distinction between cosmologists or astrophysicists who assert the universe gradually developed and ones who don't. You feel they all assert that the universe gradually developed and that those who don't assert that aren't real cosmologists or astrophysicists. This suits your purposes.
You feel creationists can't be real cosmologists or astrophysicists. I, on the other hand, do. So I make the distinction between cosmic evolutionists, cosmic creationists and the cosmologists and astrophysicists who assert neither. |
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 02:16 PM
|
#63
|
|
Obsessed Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,279
|
Quote:
|
calpurnpiso wrote
Xans wrote:
"My beliefs are not at issue here, yours are."
of COURSE they are retard!. EVERYTHING stupid and retarded you post IGNORING facts, evidence and REALITY of things are BASED on your psychosis induced beliefs! Why do you think we LAUGH at you, considering you such an ignorant delusional fool that can't tell reality from fantasy or his arse from a hole in the ground? So your beliefs, retard, are DEFINITIVELY and ISSUE here, those INSANE beliefs are what make you SCHIZOPHRENIC., after all, it is the BRAIN who produces THINKING and it is this DISTORTED thinking unable to grasp REALITY what produces such IGNORANT stupid and laughable posts. :lol: Please land.
|
My beliefs are not at issue here, I'm not the one claiming this planet evolved. Stay on topic you rambling idiot. |
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 02:16 PM
|
#64
|
|
Obsessed Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,279
|
Quote:
|
myst7426 wrote
Xans, didn't you see that hexagon shaped cloud of gas yet? It must be evidence of a creator.
|
Why?
If it was a cross I might care. |
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 02:21 PM
|
#65
|
|
Obsessed Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,279
|
Quote:
|
bokonon wrote
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
Cosmos means universe. Evolve means develop gradually. Cosmic evolution is the universe developing gradually.
|
I'm trying to understand what it is that YOU believe. Obviously, the universe changes over time -- the earth is not in the same position today that it was in yesterday. I'm guessing you're a young-earth creationist, so presumably changes over the last 6000 years are believable, but anything that would have taken longer than that violates the sanctity of the "Big Poof" theory. Correct so far? So God carefully carved each of the craters on the moon before gently rolling it into orbit? Am I on the right track? |
I suspect the universe is rather young, yes. A 6000 year old universe sounds interesting, go on. 6000 years is still a long time, perhaps the craters on the moon were made during that time. As far as you need to be concerned, I simply lack a belief in a universe which evolved in the way you present. |
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 02:34 PM
|
#66
|
|
He who walks among the theists
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Big D
Posts: 12,119
|
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
Quote:
|
nkb wrote
Xans,
Can you please explain to us why you insist on using the term "cosmo-evolutionist"?
|
From now on I'll use the term "cosmic evolutionist".
However I'll be sure and use the term "cosmo-evolutionist" again, when relevant, when I see the term Christ-Puncher or it's ilk used in a thread.
Quote:
|
Do you admit that you made this term up (or picked it up from a theist website), and it is not used in any of the scientific fields?
|
Of course I made the term up. Google it, you should only see this forum listed. And it's not used in any scientific field but it's quite easy to understand it's meaning. I asked a complete stranger what he thought it meant and he was right on. There is no need to fake being obtuse just because you're offended by my term or some other reason.
Quote:
|
Is there a reason you do not want to use "cosmologist" or "astrophysicist" instead, which are widely used?
|
As a cosmic evolutionist and an atheist yourself, you make no distinction between cosmologists or astrophysicists who assert the universe gradually developed and ones who don't. You feel they all assert that the universe gradually developed and that those who don't assert that aren't real cosmologists or astrophysicists. This suits your purposes.
You feel creationists can't be real cosmologists or astrophysicists. I, on the other hand, do. So I make the distinction between cosmic evolutionists, cosmic creationists and the cosmologists and astrophysicists who assert neither. |
OK, so you're just being a prick. Got it!
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one."
George Bernard Shaw
|
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 02:38 PM
|
#67
|
|
Obsessed Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: inside a hill
Posts: 2,910
|
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
I suspect the universe is rather young, yes. A 6000 year old universe sounds interesting, go on. 6000 years is still a long time, perhaps the craters on the moon were made during that time. As far as you need to be concerned, I simply lack a belief in a universe which evolved in the way you present.
|
A fine point, Xans. Magic is far more believable than making observatoins and gathering data to come to an understanding of what's going on. Sometimes when I want to know whats really going on the universe, I read Alice in Wonderland to get my answers. You have a similar book, I assume? |
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 02:50 PM
|
#68
|
|
Obsessed Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,279
|
Quote:
|
nkb wrote
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
Quote:
|
nkb wrote
Xans,
Can you please explain to us why you insist on using the term "cosmo-evolutionist"?
|
From now on I'll use the term "cosmic evolutionist".
However I'll be sure and use the term "cosmo-evolutionist" again, when relevant, when I see the term Christ-Puncher or it's ilk used in a thread.
Quote:
|
Do you admit that you made this term up (or picked it up from a theist website), and it is not used in any of the scientific fields?
|
Of course I made the term up. Google it, you should only see this forum listed. And it's not used in any scientific field but it's quite easy to understand it's meaning. I asked a complete stranger what he thought it meant and he was right on. There is no need to fake being obtuse just because you're offended by my term or some other reason.
Quote:
|
Is there a reason you do not want to use "cosmologist" or "astrophysicist" instead, which are widely used?
|
As a cosmic evolutionist and an atheist yourself, you make no distinction between cosmologists or astrophysicists who assert the universe gradually developed and ones who don't. You feel they all assert that the universe gradually developed and that those who don't assert that aren't real cosmologists or astrophysicists. This suits your purposes.
You feel creationists can't be real cosmologists or astrophysicists. I, on the other hand, do. So I make the distinction between cosmic evolutionists, cosmic creationists and the cosmologists and astrophysicists who assert neither. |
OK, so you're just being a prick. Got it! |
In science, saying "I don't know" isn't being a prick. |
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 03:11 PM
|
#69
|
|
Obsessed Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,279
|
Quote:
|
antix wrote
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
I suspect the universe is rather young, yes. A 6000 year old universe sounds interesting, go on. 6000 years is still a long time, perhaps the craters on the moon were made during that time. As far as you need to be concerned, I simply lack a belief in a universe which evolved in the way you present.
|
A fine point, Xans. Magic is far more believable than making observatoins and gathering data to come to an understanding of what's going on. Sometimes when I want to know whats really going on the universe, I read Alice in Wonderland to get my answers. You have a similar book, I assume? |
I'm a fan of science myself, what is this magic of yours btw? |
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 03:18 PM
|
#70
|
|
Obsessed Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,813
|
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
Quote:
|
antix wrote
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
I suspect the universe is rather young, yes. A 6000 year old universe sounds interesting, go on. 6000 years is still a long time, perhaps the craters on the moon were made during that time. As far as you need to be concerned, I simply lack a belief in a universe which evolved in the way you present.
|
A fine point, Xans. Magic is far more believable than making observatoins and gathering data to come to an understanding of what's going on. Sometimes when I want to know whats really going on the universe, I read Alice in Wonderland to get my answers. You have a similar book, I assume? |
I'm a fan of science myself, what is this magic of yours btw? |
You aren't acting like a fan of science.
"It's puzzling that Eden is synonymous with paradise when, if you think about it at all, it's more like a maximum-security prison with twenty-four hour surveillance." -Ann Druyan
|
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 05:23 PM
|
#71
|
|
I Live Here
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 23,211
|
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
Quote:
|
bokonon wrote
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
Cosmos means universe. Evolve means develop gradually. Cosmic evolution is the universe developing gradually.
|
I'm trying to understand what it is that YOU believe. Obviously, the universe changes over time -- the earth is not in the same position today that it was in yesterday. I'm guessing you're a young-earth creationist, so presumably changes over the last 6000 years are believable, but anything that would have taken longer than that violates the sanctity of the "Big Poof" theory. Correct so far? So God carefully carved each of the craters on the moon before gently rolling it into orbit? Am I on the right track? |
I suspect the universe is rather young, yes. A 6000 year old universe sounds interesting, go on. 6000 years is still a long time, perhaps the craters on the moon were made during that time. As far as you need to be concerned, I simply lack a belief in a universe which evolved in the way you present. |
Then your faith survives in spite of the mountains of multiply verified evidence that the universe does change over vast time spans and that biological systems evolve through replication/variation/selection which changing non-biological systems like mountains do not.
So, have your faith and welcome to it, just realize that claiming you have evidence to support it may be properly treated as a falsehood until you produce some.
It is not a virtue to sit back and proclaim that you simply do not believe the amassed facts. Belief, absent evidence, is not correlated with truth.
"Those who most loudly proclaim their honesty are least likely to possess it."
"Atheism: rejecting all absurdity." S.H.
"Reality, the God alternative"
|
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 05:29 PM
|
#72
|
|
I Live Here
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 23,211
|
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
Quote:
|
nkb wrote
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
Quote:
|
nkb wrote
Xans,
Can you please explain to us why you insist on using the term "cosmo-evolutionist"?
|
From now on I'll use the term "cosmic evolutionist".
However I'll be sure and use the term "cosmo-evolutionist" again, when relevant, when I see the term Christ-Puncher or it's ilk used in a thread.
Quote:
|
Do you admit that you made this term up (or picked it up from a theist website), and it is not used in any of the scientific fields?
|
Of course I made the term up. Google it, you should only see this forum listed. And it's not used in any scientific field but it's quite easy to understand it's meaning. I asked a complete stranger what he thought it meant and he was right on. There is no need to fake being obtuse just because you're offended by my term or some other reason.
As a cosmic evolutionist and an atheist yourself, you make no distinction between cosmologists or astrophysicists who assert the universe gradually developed and ones who don't. You feel they all assert that the universe gradually developed and that those who don't assert that aren't real cosmologists or astrophysicists. This suits your purposes.
You feel creationists can't be real cosmologists or astrophysicists. I, on the other hand, do. So I make the distinction between cosmic evolutionists, cosmic creationists and the cosmologists and astrophysicists who assert neither. |
OK, so you're just being a prick. Got it! |
In science, saying "I don't know" isn't being a prick. |
You are saying, in effect, "I will never know because I reject the current facts as well as any future facts. Meantime I will proceed as though those facts did not exist." That is very prick-like behavior.
"Those who most loudly proclaim their honesty are least likely to possess it."
"Atheism: rejecting all absurdity." S.H.
"Reality, the God alternative"
|
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 07:02 PM
|
#73
|
|
Guest
|
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
As far as you need to be concerned, I simply lack a belief in a universe which evolved in the way you present.
|
I don't think I've presented any scripts for how the universe evolved, but I'll assume you've confused me with someone else.
You say you think the universe is relatively young, so I assume you reject the notion that doppler-shifted light from distant galaxies suggests the light has been traveling for billions of years. Do you do this because you believe that doppler-shifted light has not been observed, or that the conclusions to be drawn from doppler-shifted light (i.e., more shift reflects greater distance) are incorrect?
I assume you also reject plate tectonics, which suggests that Africa and South America have been moving apart for over 100 million years. Unless I'm mistaken, and this falls within your "relatively young" ballpark (see, I can talk sports too), what is your basis for rejecting plate tectonics, and what is your theory on the formation of the Himalayas, the Rockies, and the Appalachian Mountains? |
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 07:24 PM
|
#74
|
|
He who walks among the theists
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Big D
Posts: 12,119
|
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
Quote:
|
nkb wrote
Quote:
|
Xans wrote
Quote:
|
nkb wrote
Xans,
Can you please explain to us why you insist on using the term "cosmo-evolutionist"?
|
From now on I'll use the term "cosmic evolutionist".
However I'll be sure and use the term "cosmo-evolutionist" again, when relevant, when I see the term Christ-Puncher or it's ilk used in a thread.
Quote:
|
Do you admit that you made this term up (or picked it up from a theist website), and it is not used in any of the scientific fields?
|
Of course I made the term up. Google it, you should only see this forum listed. And it's not used in any scientific field but it's quite easy to understand it's meaning. I asked a complete stranger what he thought it meant and he was right on. There is no need to fake being obtuse just because you're offended by my term or some other reason.
As a cosmic evolutionist and an atheist yourself, you make no distinction between cosmologists or astrophysicists who assert the universe gradually developed and ones who don't. You feel they all assert that the universe gradually developed and that those who don't assert that aren't real cosmologists or astrophysicists. This suits your purposes.
You feel creationists can't be real cosmologists or astrophysicists. I, on the other hand, do. So I make the distinction between cosmic evolutionists, cosmic creationists and the cosmologists and astrophysicists who assert neither. |
OK, so you're just being a prick. Got it! |
In science, saying "I don't know" isn't being a prick. |
But making up terms and pretending they make sense, just to be antagonistic, is all about being a prick.
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one."
George Bernard Shaw
|
|
|
|
|
08-08-2007, 07:35 PM
|
#75
|
|
I Live Here
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Chandler- Arizona
Posts: 14,227
|
Xans wrote:
"My beliefs are not at issue here, I'm not the one claiming this planet evolved. Stay on topic you rambling idiot. "
no ,but your DELUSIONAL STUPID PSYCHOTIC thinking is! Moron.
Obviously retarded products of incest born out of assholes are unable to think straight. Here is proof your are dysfunctional unable to see what side is up..:lol:
You retard moron wrote:
"If it was a cross I might care. "
If it was a CROSS?....:lol::lol::lol: See/.. IREST MY CASE..Go suck your aunt-mom's tit. Your stupid INFANTILE RETARDED brain needs nourishment ..:lol::lol:
Hey Retard, you have already PROVEN to all of us who the idiot is . :lol::lol: Got Auntie-mom Milk?...:lol:
There is no wonder you are SO STUPID. I would not be surprised if you had an extra deformed arm to match your deformed brain..:lol:
Christians and other folks infected with delusional beliefs think and reason like schizophrenics or temporal lobe epileptics. Their morality is dictated by an invisible friend called Jesus.
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:11 PM.
|
