Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: 2MAR$ who wrote (58128)	9/17/2014 7:13:49 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 69300

"The guy is such a blubbering bozo, when does he ever get time for prayer? Or is there an apologist explanation for hanging out on the internet blubbering all day long to? --->Blubbering Bozo (perfect)" YEP! I like it! It suits him! Imagine being so cornered by his own superstitious book of absurd, contradictory tribal tales that he desperately and shamefacedly resorts to the infantile claim that the book of genesis is not really a creation myth but was written in code!! Apparently God wanted people with anything more than half a brain to jump ship--while cretins like gregoree would stay aboard blubbering, "the 6 days of creation doesn't mean 6 days! IT IS A CODE!! As soon as we decipher the code we will let you know! Even though it claims that Creation was finished and God rested on the seventh day, this is a code, too! That would mean that God was resting when he murdered everyone except Noah and his crew! SOME REST!! So no matter how we try to de-code a "day"--nothing works for us. It is a hard code to crack. YIKES!! Fu_k Solon! What would he know about magical codes and the way Moses tricked all the scientists and atheists by talking about the morning and the evening of the first day, the second day, etc.!!!" greg or ee (weeping but still looking for the code--praise Joshua!) _______________________________ Message 29717687 "there is a debate even among Christians as to the meaning of the word "Day" as it is used in Genesis?" No there isn't. There is no debate anywhere by anyone. There is merely a pathetic and contemptible scurrying down rat holes by Christian apologists! So describe your rat hole for us! Science says the earth is 4.5 BILLION years old! The bible indicates it is about 6000 years old. Science says man is perhaps 100,000 years old or so. The bible (again!) stupidly claims we are 6000 years old! So unless you can pretend and prove that genesis was written in code...the bible is a tribal creation myth. And that myth thoroughly contradicts the FACTS OF REALITY!!! So share with us the secret code--or STFU!!! There is either a secret code or there is not. So tell us about the six days of creation??? I guess you think you are being hammered, eh!? ;-) Did Adam name all the animals AFTER the 6 days of creation?? Did Cain murder Abel AFTER the 6 days of creation?? :-) Did the Great Flood happen AFTER the 6 days of creation?? Squeak up! I can't hear you! Pussy got your tongue, Laddy??

To: 2MAR$ who wrote (58128)	9/17/2014 7:50:00 PM
From: TigerPaw	2 Recommendations Recommended By 2MAR$ Solon Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 69300

"how long a day is" A day is sun-up to sundown. If that period was significantly longer then all things on earth would die in the intense heat of a long sunlight period, and freeze in the long darkness of night, even on the equator. TP

To: 2MAR$ who wrote (58128)	9/19/2014 5:15:37 AM
From: 2MAR$	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 69300

Do IDiots understand evolutionary theory? Do Intelligent Design Creationists (IDiots) understand evolution? ... of course not. He doesn't do this, of course, and that's only partly because it suits his purpose to be dissembling. It's mostly because he really doesn't understand what he's talking about. We know this because dozens of people have tried to explain it to him over the years and he still doesn't get it. It's been really frustrating over the past 25 years trying to explain modern evolutionary theory to IDiots. They continue to refer to "Darwinism" and "neo-Darwinism" but it's obvious that they don't have a clue what they mean by those terms. This become especially obvious when they discover, once again, that real evolutionary biologists don't accept the IDiots' version of evolutionary theory. Check out the latest post by Casey Luskin on Evolution News & Views. It would be so easy for him to explain to his readers what the textbooks say on evolutionary theory and how it differs from what the IDiots are promoting in their own books and on their websites [ Are Biologists Rejecting Neo-Darwinian Evolution?]. He doesn't do this, of course, and that's only partly because it suits his purpose to be dissembling. It's mostly because he really doesn't understand what he's talking about. We know this because dozens of people have tried to explain it to him over the years and he still doesn't get it. In fairness, Casey Luskin is responding to an article on The BioLogos Forum by philosopher Robert C. Bishop [ Two Rhetorical Strategies (Reviewing “Darwin’s Doubt”: Robert Bishop, Part 2)]. It's pretty clear that Bishop doesn't understand modern evolutionary theory either. Unfortunately, there are many scientists who share these misconceptions but that's not an excuse for Luskin and his fellow travelers since they are supposed to understand what they spend so much time attacking.