The Bathroom Wall

With any tavern, one can expect that certain things that get said are out-of-place. But there is one place where almost any saying or scribble can find a home: the bathroom wall. This is where random thoughts and oddments that don’t follow the other entries at the Panda’s Thumb wind up. As with most bathroom walls, expect to sort through a lot of oyster guts before you locate any pearls of wisdom.

34761 Comments

There is a God!

And he is a plumber. The Bathroom has been flushed.

Thank you Reed.

Great!

Course, that still leaves what happens when the new plumbing acquires a big drip…

Wait, what am I saying?

Ingeborg Esbrandt said:

Hey, nice post :) - well, even though I came via Google searching for “justfaces spreadshirt” wondering why this post came up on top??? Greetings xoxo

Spammer alert!

To make one point about the previous thread. John Kwok wrote:

“Sorry Jim, but your invocation of the Ground Zero Mosque controversy is not helpful here. Incidentally there are many Muslims and Muslim Americans who oppose its construction, simply because they recognize that building it near Ground Zero is needlessly offensive to the families of the victims and the survivors of the 9/11 attack. Some of the most prominent critics - who are Muslim Americans - include Wall Street businessman Mansoor Ijaz (who tried to assist the Clinton administration in extraditing Osama bin Laden from the Sudan) and former United States Navy officer Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser.

[…]

If you are going to call Miss USA, a Muslim American, Rima Fakih, a bigot, then be my guest. Same is true for those two prominent Muslim Americans I had mentioned. Or other Muslim Americans who, like them, have spoken out against building the “Cordoba House” Islamic Center (Of course I am also against it, but am definitely not a bigot.).”

Unless YOU are a practicing Muslim your opposition to this cultural center is pure bigotry, so your saying that you’re “definitely not a bigot” is false. Your ruse of hiding behind the Muslim-Americans’ backs is the same as of the racists who think that using the n-word is OK because so many African-Americans use it. If you are a Muslim, well then, I find your views on the issue just silly, not bigoted.

Kris,

You can’t possibly know what I know.

mrg said:

DS said: Kris has certainly demonstrated that he doesn’t deserve anything more.

Actually, I was suggesting we all insult and abuse DH. If he wants to invite it, why not oblige?

We already tried that on Kris. You can only call someone an @$$hole, a bastard and crazy so many times before it gets tiresome. What’s the point of bashing me?

Kris has called me a liar for stating the obvious facts about him. We can all see what he has done, so why would he deny the stunts he has pulled? He is the one who invaded our space to attack the cause of the blog, yet he expects us to be tolerant and respectful of him no matter what he says? There is no law or principle I know that demands any such thing.

Kris said:

What you said about me is a complete lie. I didn’t start the insults and attacks. You and your asshole buddies here did. And trying to con FF with lies about me and that swill about respecting people you and they (“we”) don’t agree with is yet another one of your acts of deliberate dishonesty. You and most others here wouldn’t know what respect is if it hit you like a freight train going 60 miles per hour.

Since the statements you make about me are false, you’re a deliberate liar, according to your own standards for others. Of course your standards for yourself are completely different. How convenient for you.

The ONLY reason you and most others aren’t now viciously attacking FF is because she said she’s a woman. Even then, some of you have been pretty blunt to her, and especially rude before she said she’s a woman, even though she has been nice the whole time.

My questions to her are not an attack or a trap. They are sincere. You are grossly misrepresenting me and are just showing yourself to be the hypocritical, dishonest, delusional liar you are.

You are a seriously fucked up lunatic with delusions of godhood who needs a good ass kicking.

By the way, Mr. theological agnostic, unitarian, universalist, dis-honorable, bushido, liberal, un-scientific pseudo-skeptic, what are you going to add to or subtract from your self-created, self-serving, bogus religion tomorrow?

You just keep piling up your lies and hypocrisy Dale. You said “You do what you like, but I’m done with Kris for good.” yet you’re still bashing me and lying about me.

You also said you respect people with whom you disagree but then you say “I went after him anyway.” when you first saw me here. When I first came here I didn’t say anything that warranted you going after me.

Plus, you said you respect people with whom you disagree but then you say “I’d go after Ann Coulter if that bitch showed up here too.” So much for you respecting people you disagree with.

As usual the things you claim about yourself, and me, are false, which makes you a chronic LIAR, according to your standards for others.

You admit to slamming me a lot but of course you try to make it look like you’re a saint for doing so. Whether you or anyone else here ever accepts it or not, I’m just giving you and others shit back because you and/or they started it, either with me or someone else who didn’t or doesn’t deserve it.

I didn’t escalate the situation. You and your fellow, lying, arrogant hypocrites did.

It really cracks me up to see you guys acting exactly like some of the creationists you hate and condemn so much. You accuse and attack them for not listening and having closed minds, and for playing what you think are ridiculous games, but you do the same thing. Congratulations, you have become your enemy.

FODS

I haven’t lied about anything, you jackass! The simple fact is that you have invaded Panda’s Thumb and have been a disruptive force from the beginning and have played us like suckers. I’m not fooled by you and no one else is. Even if you were insulted by one or two people in the beginning, you could have ignored it and just responded to the ones who were being positive to you, like flowersfriend has been, but instead you started throwing shit at everyone who dared to reject your tactics. We insulted you because that seemed to be what you liked, but I get tired of that after a while. You don’t, appearantly.

If you seriously think you have made ANY positive contributions to this community here, you are even more delusional than most Creationists!

Dale Husband said: What’s the point of bashing me?

None whatsoever, but since any comments to a troll are going to produce nothing but bashing in response, that leads to what the point of the comments was.

John often fails to read for comprehension. A poor highschool education , no doubt.

Ghrom said:

To make one point about the previous thread. John Kwok wrote:

“Sorry Jim, but your invocation of the Ground Zero Mosque controversy is not helpful here. Incidentally there are many Muslims and Muslim Americans who oppose its construction, simply because they recognize that building it near Ground Zero is needlessly offensive to the families of the victims and the survivors of the 9/11 attack. Some of the most prominent critics - who are Muslim Americans - include Wall Street businessman Mansoor Ijaz (who tried to assist the Clinton administration in extraditing Osama bin Laden from the Sudan) and former United States Navy officer Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser.

[…]

If you are going to call Miss USA, a Muslim American, Rima Fakih, a bigot, then be my guest. Same is true for those two prominent Muslim Americans I had mentioned. Or other Muslim Americans who, like them, have spoken out against building the “Cordoba House” Islamic Center (Of course I am also against it, but am definitely not a bigot.).”

Unless YOU are a practicing Muslim your opposition to this cultural center is pure bigotry, so your saying that you’re “definitely not a bigot” is false. Your ruse of hiding behind the Muslim-Americans’ backs is the same as of the racists who think that using the n-word is OK because so many African-Americans use it. If you are a Muslim, well then, I find your views on the issue just silly, not bigoted.

Malchus said: A poor highschool education , no doubt.

Oh Bob, I can hear the howls now: “Set phasers to SLAUGHTER!”

Kris said:

Mike Elzinga said:

With a troll’s profile ready at hand, and with sufficient discipline on the part of the regulars, that could be cut to zero.

Profile ready at hand? What exactly does that mean Mike? Ready for what or whom? Do you have printed profiles of all the people you’ve labeled as trolls and hand them out to passersby on street corners? Or, do you create a profile file in your computer containing your intricate and exhaustive (LMAO!) calculations and determinations about each alleged troll and somehow send a copy of it to everyone on Earth to warn them of impending doom? Or, do you only dispense it to other regulars here who are able to contact you personally and who request a copy because they let you do their thinking for them?

Or, do you just think that your stupid ‘profiles’ actually matter, when in reality they actually don’t? Do you really believe that what happens on this website, or your asinine profiles, or what you do with them, matters one iota to the vast majority of the people on Earth? Get over yourself Mike.

Hey, if you have my profile handy, why don’t you post it here? I could use a good laugh.

Your “profile” is a person who needs attention and does not even try to get it by behaving in any consistent or coherent fashion. You are a manipulative jerk who takes ANY response from others and uses it as an excuse to attack. You bash us for not being tolerant enough of Creationists, while stating Creationist fallacies yourself. Then you turn around and deny being religious and question why certain others who are Creationist take their religion so seriously. Such strange behavior is pathological in the extreme.

Gee, this website seems VERY important to you, considering how much time you spend here.

You are either crazy or a fraud, Kris.

The fun thing about the BW is that the trolls either have to cave in and respond on the BW – which they don’t want to do – or pass up responding – which they REALLY don’t want to do.

Kris said:

Whatever you do, don’t even consider that when people come here and sincerely want to ask, discuss, debate, learn, and/or contribute in some way, that when they’re mercilessly insulted and attacked and erroneously lumped into your hated group of ID/creationists, they just might not like it and may fight back, and especially when they offer reasonable explanations of their words and the explanations (and the person) are ignored, misinterpreted, misrepresented, slammed, bashed, and ridiculed by you and the rest of the mindless haters here. Yeah, don’t even consider that for a second. You and the other haters and bashers here are way too perfect to have to consider such things. It’s never your fault.

Your track record is too well known here for us to consider that you are sincere about anything. You are even WORSE than the average Creationist troll because you keep going back and forth between acting non-religious and acting like a Creationist. You cannot be both, so you must be bullshitting us. Nobody here can take that seriously.

Expressed violent thoughts a number of times?? Yeah Mike, I would thoroughly enjoy kicking your ass and the asses of anyone else who has called me a liar, but I haven’t “expressed violent thoughts a number of times” in the way you’re implying. You’re the one who needs a psychiatrist, along with some others here. If you’re considered sane, I’d rather be considered crazy. And comparing me or anyone else you simply don’t agree with to a serial killer just helps show how paranoid and delusional you are.

If you don’t like being called a liar, stop being one. At least I have ALWAYS told the truth about YOU.

DH, a very minor issue here: the first part you cited above was addressed to me, and personally I find it amusing to watch such comments fall into a hole of resounding silence.

However, as far as the rest goes, carry on.

mrg said:

DH, a very minor issue here: the first part you cited above was addressed to me, and personally I find it amusing to watch such comments fall into a hole of resounding silence.

However, as far as the rest goes, carry on.

Oh, did you want to answer him here first? Be my guest. But I figured I’d just make a note of ANY inappropriate thing Kris says elsewhere and post it here, answer it here, and wait for Kris to take the hint and stop attacking us everywhere else and just slam people here.

Dale Husband said: Oh, did you want to answer him here first? Be my guest.

Why would I want to do that? But if my own rejoinder is indifference, I can at least politely ask that the effect not be spoiled.

Kris threatens: “I would thoroughly enjoy kicking your ass and the asses of anyone else who has called me a liar,…”

Lotsa bluster; everybody’s collective asses are exposed right here.

Mike Elzinga said: … everybody’s collective asses are exposed right here.

AARGH! I am so outa here!

Kris said:

Mike Elzinga said:

mrg said:

Serial killers are maybe a bit much of a comparison.

The point was the sociopathic needs of such an individual. This troll has expressed violent thoughts a number of times. But a psychiatrist would have a better handle on this that I.

I think people like attention; it’s just a question of what kind of attention. When I was the factory contact guy in my corporate life, a colleague in marketing told me that it was true I put up with a lot of abuse – I did – but added: “People thank you sometimes.”

And they did. I get thanks on occasion for my current efforts as well – not often, and maybe thanks aren’t the be-all and end-all of the effort … but on the other side of the coin, if nobody ever thanks me, what reason would I have to honestly believe what I was doing actually did anyone good?

Now take the negative mentalities that show up here … does anyone ever thank them for what they’re doing? It’s obvious it never happens, and just as obvious that they haven’t any expectation that it will.

They still want attention, and lacking any concept that they will ever be praised, they have no alternative but to be disruptive. If one cannot build, then they can only take satisfaction in destruction.

Yeah; you are pointing out common desires that nearly everyone has. But sociopaths also know this and manipulate these.

But I suspect most of us can simply walk away from these kinds of manipulations when we have other things to do that are satisfying; and I suspect most of the moderators here on PT do in fact have other things vying for their attention.

Hell, I’m retired and I can’t get through everything I want to get through in a week. The only reason I even show up here is that the PT topics are often very interesting, and I have a high speed connection that allows me to look in from time to time when I happen to be working on my computer. So most of the time I’m multitasking up a storm when I’m here.

Expressed violent thoughts a number of times?? Yeah Mike, I would thoroughly enjoy kicking your ass and the asses of anyone else who has called me a liar, but I haven’t “expressed violent thoughts a number of times” in the way you’re implying. You’re the one who needs a psychiatrist, along with some others here. If you’re considered sane, I’d rather be considered crazy. And comparing me or anyone else you simply don’t agree with to a serial killer just helps show how paranoid and delusional you are.

Whew! Glad I never called Kris a liar. I only called him a coward and a bully.

Mike Elzinga said: Lotsa bluster; everybody’s collective asses are exposed right here.

So it’s like “one of these days Alice, POW! To the mooning”?

Another collection of Kris’ delusional rants.

Kris said:

And of course your insulting comments, and the insulting comments by the other hypocrites here, don’t violate any of those rules you posted, eh?

Apparently, all that matters here is that any insults have to be aimed at creationists or anyone who doesn’t blindly and viciously attack them right along with you guys/gals.

Giving you back your own shit isn’t allowed. Questioning you isn’t allowed. Having a mind of my own isn’t allowed. Calling you on your bullshit isn’t allowed. Anything less than total devotion and obedience to you and your creationist hating ‘cause’ isn’t allowed. Hypocrisy, by you and your cohorts, is allowed, and encouraged.

Kris said:

And of course you and others going on and on about “trolls”, and repeatedly posting “DNFTT”, isn’t “SPAM”. Yeah, whatever.

Why do you think that a “dissenter” is automatically a “troll”? You’ve said you’re a Christian. Would your Christian God approve of your insulting, hypocritical, hateful behavior?

Kris said:

Maybe, just maybe the moderators are getting wise to the hypocrisy and other bullshit you and others are guilty of.

Now STFU spamming troll.

How do you like your own shit thrown back at you?

Panda’s Thumb is a blog made for defending evolution and promoting proper science education, and since Kris was the one who invaded the blog to spew both Creationist arguments that we were expected to “tolerate” (like we are supposed to tolerate falsehoods?) and then claim to be non-religious at other times, why shouldn’t we regard him as unwelcome, inconsistent and disruptive? Why shouldn’t we treat him like he is the enemy, when that’s all he has ever acted like since he arrived here?

An example of hypocrisy would be us invading and attacking ID promoters on Uncommon Descent. I’ve never done that, and never will. Maybe Kris can go over there and drive the ID people crazy for a while, to prove to us once and for all that he is an equal-opportunity critic, and not a bigoted Creationist concern troll.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/

Kris the creationist wrote:

“If, however, “descent with modification” is defined as showing that speciation (evolution) occurs and/or occurred, then that’s a different ballgame, and requires greater evidence. While a lot of evidence points to a persuasive probability that descent with modification, including divergence/speciation, occurred throughout(?) the history of life, there’s a lot more work to do to before it can reasonably be said that it has been established close to 100%, and I’m not sure it can be reasonably said that it can be established ‘empirically’. Many inferences have been and have to be made, and inferences are a matter of opinion.”

This is of course incorrect. I already posted a link to a web page entitled:

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution

If Kris wants to discuss the point, he can do so here. Maybe someone will want to discuss it with him. Unless of course he is just plain chicken shit.

DS said: Kris the creationist wrote:

You might just leave a short bland note on the original thread to invite him to come to the BW for discussion. He’ll ignore it, of course, but that works too.

Yawn.

(Bored.)

All the spamming at The Immune System Cross-examination Still Burns, and other forums, is very unChristlike, don’t you think?

Makes you wonder if these anti-science creation-supporters are Christians? (Never known a real creationist who wasn’t.)

It’s funny how trolls stubbornly resist being prodded to direct their comments to the BW. They know that once they do, they don’t have any real nuisance value any more: “What’s the point of trolling, then?”

Kris huffs and puffs and squeaks “What are you afraid of?” hiding behind his mommy’s apron. Afraid to mix it up on the big kid’s playground, he’ll sit in the sandbox and cry.

Poor widdle Kwis! Mean old scientists call you out on your stupid shit? Maybe if we ignore the little wanker he’ll go back into the closet and play with himself.

Geeze, I’m beginning to miss FL! I tell you, the neighborhood is going to hell.

I knew the asshole was chicken shit. All he haas to do is come here and provide a better explanation for the 29 different independent data sets that are all consistent with common descent. Until he does, I guess he will just be someone who believes in evolution but not in common descent. Yea right.

Everyone should remember, he had his chance to discuss science, he chose to quote mine and insult instead. He can cry all he wants to now, but everyone is wise to his crap.

SWT said:

Yardbird said:

Henry J said:

So was that like a Floydian slip?

Oww! What are you, some kind of musician?

No. he’s just Meddle-ing …

Maybe he’s a Black Sabbath fan. In which case, he’d be Metal-ing.

SAY WHAT?

Pat Robertson and others at his Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) on Wednesday told a terminally ill woman that she was making a mistake if she chose to end her life on her terms. “She has brain cancer, but brain cancer can get healed,” he opined. “God can heal anything.”

I say, Pat Robertson is a sad excuse for a human being.

Yardbird said:

SAY WHAT?

Pat Robertson and others at his Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) on Wednesday told a terminally ill woman that she was making a mistake if she chose to end her life on her terms. “She has brain cancer, but brain cancer can get healed,” he opined. “God can heal anything.”

I say, Pat Robertson is a sad excuse for a human being.

So they don’t choose to respect her free will choice?

They don’t want to leave it a matter between her and God?

Of course they don’t. That wouldn’t leave them with any authority – with any power over her life.

Just Bob said:

Of course they don’t. That wouldn’t leave them with any authority – with any power over her life.

I agree that’s part of it, but as important is their fear that they’re beliefs might be wrong. That’s intolerable because they have no capacity for modifying their world view. If they’re wrong, then they get NOTHING. (No chocolate, no snozzberries, no everlasting god-stoppers.) As a result, they have to attack anyone who calmly and deliberately chooses to do things that contradict those beliefs. That’s what makes David Starling MacMillan unusual, that he was able to make that change.

Yardbird said:

SAY WHAT?

Pat Robertson and others at his Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) on Wednesday told a terminally ill woman that she was making a mistake if she chose to end her life on her terms. “She has brain cancer, but brain cancer can get healed,” he opined. “God can heal anything.”

I say, Pat Robertson is a sad excuse for a human being.

With more people like Pat, doctors would be out of work, no hospitals, just trust God to fix you?? They are insane.

Rolf said: With more people like Pat, doctors would be out of work, no hospitals, just trust God to fix you?? They are insane.

I’m pretty sure Pat, off camera, doesn’t just trust God to fix him. He apparently had heart surgery in 2009 - I guess he lacks faith.

riandouglas said:

I’m pretty sure Pat, off camera, doesn’t just trust God to fix him. He apparently had heart surgery in 2009 - I guess he lacks faith.

And so it goes with those who profess boundless belief in faith healing.

Consider Flawd, who preaches miraculous cures, but takes himself and his children to modern, faith-free, evolution-based medical practitioners. At the same time, he refuses to repudiate the murderous faith-killing of his coreligionists in Oregon and Pennsylvania, who let their children die of neglect, and of the snake-handlers, who drop dead when bitten, just like the meanest atheist. Flawd should explain to them why it’s OK to go to doctors like he does. But he won’t.

Consider Poofster, who buys health insurance for his family.

Even the religious loonies recognize enough reality to help themselves to real medicine. Faith just isn’t enough to deal with real health problems.

phhht said: Consider Flawd, who preaches miraculous cures, but takes himself and his children to modern, faith-free, evolution-based medical practitioners.

Perhaps, deep down, Flawd realises his God is an arsehole (like himself). Or perhaps Flawd realises his God doesn’t actually exist.

Flawd should explain to them why it’s OK to go to doctors like he does. But he won’t.

Just more of the inconsistent nature of FL’s beliefs. Why follow what the bible actually says when it could get you killed? Hey FL, you got a reasonable, consistent, non-idiotic explanation for this behaviour?

riandouglas said:

Rolf said: With more people like Pat, doctors would be out of work, no hospitals, just trust God to fix you?? They are insane.

I’m pretty sure Pat, off camera, doesn’t just trust God to fix him. He apparently had heart surgery in 2009 - I guess he lacks faith.

Just totally surprised that he’s got a heart.

riandouglas said:

phhht said: Consider Flawd, who preaches miraculous cures, but takes himself and his children to modern, faith-free, evolution-based medical practitioners.

Perhaps, deep down, Flawd realises his God is an arsehole (like himself). Or perhaps Flawd realises his God doesn’t actually exist.

Flawd should explain to them why it’s OK to go to doctors like he does. But he won’t.

Just more of the inconsistent nature of FL’s beliefs. Why follow what the bible actually says when it could get you killed? Hey FL, you got a reasonable, consistent, non-idiotic explanation for this behaviour?

Almost. He’s American, so he’s an asshole! (Yeah, yeah, tomato/tomahto.)

Robert Byers said: Science is a methodology that only includes reasoning linearly.

What does “reasining linearly” even mean?

Science demands a method. That method includes testing, having something to test, a whole family of evidence to back up the tiny reasoning /data case.

How does reasoning from the evidence to common descent not fit in with the method(s) of science? What is the limit to how big/small a “line of reasoning” can be before it is no longer valid science? Where is the delimiter and why is it at that point and not some place else? Or are you just making shit up because you don’t like the conclusions reached? I’m guessing it’s the latter.

In fact these trees all demand as the only option that likeness equals common origin.

The trees show relationships between species based upon the evidence. How is that not scientific?

it excludes other options like common design.

“Common design” isn’t an option Robert.

Common design also would predict these trees.

Then show your reasoning (such as it is) instead of asserting it. Just how/why would your putative designer do what it is we find around us? You can’t because your design hypothesis is vague, ill defined and unfalsifiable. You take the branching nested hierarchy as evidence of design. You would take a non-nested arrangement as evidence of design. To people like yourself, everything and it’s opposite is evidence of design. Which results in there being no evidence FOR your claimed design.

AGAIN. Eyeballs on everybody is not proof of a single eyeball origin in a fish. Eyeballs easily would be on segregated biology from a creators blueprint.

You’ve seen this blueprint? You know the designer would give humans 3 colour vision and the mantis shrimp 6 colour vision? Or are you just making shit up here? Reasons Robert - you’ve got none.

The option of common design ruins common descent claims of evidence from likeness. Common descent is just another option.

There is no “common design” Robert. Commenters here have asked you to provide your evidence FOR YEARS, and you’ve come up empty. AiG, ICR, DI - all of them have nothing to show. Common descent not only neatly explains exactly why we find a nested heirarchy, but it’s also the only game in town as far as explanations go.

Eyes are indeed in a few types. yet that makles the creationist case.

Of course it does, because you have no concrete hypothesis. If every species had a different type of eye, it would make the creationist case. If there was only a single type of eye to be found anywhere, that would make the creationist case. EVERYTHING that could possibly be imagined and it’s converse makes the creationists case, does it not?

In all the time and all the evolution the eyes never evolved in a thousand ways.

And your complete ignorance of evolutionary biology shows.

Insects have a type as they must and us. As it would be from a creator. We are too different for the same eyes.

Making shit up again. No reasons. No explanations. Not even “lines of reasoning” from you Robert. Just excuses and bullshit.

Eyes are so alike for us, cats, dinos that its unlikely they have been influenced at all by evolution since way before the dinos. i’m using evolutionists timelines here and not ours(correct ones).

Why do cats have black and white vision while humans see (barely) in colour? Your timelines the “correct ones”? How quaint of you to mix in your ignorance of geology, cosmology, atomic theory and so on with your ignorance of evolutionary biology.

only a few models for eyes as it would be from a creator. Not from evolutions mutation/selection abilities.

We know designers (human designers that is) don’t just go for a “few models”. Just look at forms of transportations - cars, trains, bikes, horses, planes, boats, and the variety within those categories. So, as far as the designer we have experience with (US) are concerned, fewer models appears to be evidence AGAINST design, not for it. But, since you don’t actually have anything more than a vague claim, since you don’t have any empirical predictions which follow and could be used to test your claims against reality, you’re free to say whatever you wish. Only, you’re not doing science, you’re not even reasoning from lines of evidence.

You’re just making shit up as you go. You have nothing to offer Robert, and you’ve shown it by offering nothing for years.

Rolf said:

If only Robert would define “common design” for us. Can you do that Robert? You know what it is, don’t you?

Common design is whatever he needs it to be to avoid facing reality. There’s no content. I doubt it has much detail beyond the 2 words “common design”, because much more might render his beliefs falsifiable, which I assume it intolerable.

Yardbird said: Just totally surprised that he’s got a heart.

He probably took it from 1 of his victims :-)

Apparently the doctors who did the surgery had little to no role to play (from Huffington Post”: “Only the prayers of thousands of believing people kept me on this earth,” Robertson said in a statement.

He’s also not been healed by his God for prostate cancer, 2 previous heart procedures, and a dodgy knee.

So much for relying upon God for healing.

transplanting comment from here:

Robert Byers said: Science is a methodology that only includes reasoning linearly.

What does “reasining linearly” even mean?

Science demands a method. That method includes testing, having something to test, a whole family of evidence to back up the tiny reasoning /data case.

How does reasoning from the evidence to common descent not fit in with the method(s) of science? What is the limit to how big/small a “line of reasoning” can be before it is no longer valid science? Where is the delimiter and why is it at that point and not some place else? Or are you just making shit up because you don’t like the conclusions reached? I’m guessing it’s the latter.

In fact these trees all demand as the only option that likeness equals common origin.

The trees show relationships between species based upon the evidence. How is that not scientific?

it excludes other options like common design.

“Common design” isn’t an option Robert.

Common design also would predict these trees.

Then show your reasoning (such as it is) instead of asserting it. Just how/why would your putative designer do what it is we find around us? You can’t because your design hypothesis is vague, ill defined and unfalsifiable. You take the branching nested hierarchy as evidence of design. You would take a non-nested arrangement as evidence of design. To people like yourself, everything and it’s opposite is evidence of design. Which results in there being no evidence FOR your claimed design.

AGAIN. Eyeballs on everybody is not proof of a single eyeball origin in a fish. Eyeballs easily would be on segregated biology from a creators blueprint.

You’ve seen this blueprint? You know the designer would give humans 3 colour vision and the mantis shrimp 6 colour vision? Or are you just making shit up here? Reasons Robert - you’ve got none.

The option of common design ruins common descent claims of evidence from likeness. Common descent is just another option.

There is no “common design” Robert. Commenters here have asked you to provide your evidence FOR YEARS, and you’ve come up empty. AiG, ICR, DI - all of them have nothing to show. Common descent not only neatly explains exactly why we find a nested heirarchy, but it’s also the only game in town as far as explanations go.

Eyes are indeed in a few types. yet that makles the creationist case.

Of course it does, because you have no concrete hypothesis. If every species had a different type of eye, it would make the creationist case. If there was only a single type of eye to be found anywhere, that would make the creationist case. EVERYTHING that could possibly be imagined and it’s converse makes the creationists case, does it not?

In all the time and all the evolution the eyes never evolved in a thousand ways.

And your complete ignorance of evolutionary biology shows.

Insects have a type as they must and us. As it would be from a creator. We are too different for the same eyes.

Making shit up again. No reasons. No explanations. Not even “lines of reasoning” from you Robert. Just excuses and bullshit.

Eyes are so alike for us, cats, dinos that its unlikely they have been influenced at all by evolution since way before the dinos. i’m using evolutionists timelines here and not ours(correct ones).

Why do cats have black and white vision while humans see (barely) in colour? Your timelines the “correct ones”? How quaint of you to mix in your ignorance of geology, cosmology, atomic theory and so on with your ignorance of evolutionary biology.

only a few models for eyes as it would be from a creator. Not from evolutions mutation/selection abilities.

We know designers (human designers that is) don’t just go for a “few models”. Just look at forms of transportations - cars, trains, bikes, horses, planes, boats, and the variety within those categories. So, as far as the designer we have experience with (US) are concerned, fewer models appears to be evidence AGAINST design, not for it. But, since you don’t actually have anything more than a vague claim, since you don’t have any empirical predictions which follow and could be used to test your claims against reality, you’re free to say whatever you wish. Only, you’re not doing science, you’re not even reasoning from lines of evidence.

You’re just making shit up as you go. You have nothing to offer Robert, and you’ve shown it by offering nothing for years.

This comment has been moved to The Bathroom Wall I meant it, folks. JF.

Tarred with the Epithet Loony: An Intermittent Series

Scoffers enjoy mocking the Genesis creation account by equating it with some kind of magic, but this overlooks the critical difference between magic and biblical creation. In magic, objects materialize from no source—from nothing and nobody—violating the laws of causality. But creation according to Genesis asserts that God—an actual and ultimate cause—created all things by His Word.

Brian Thomas, Institute for Creation Research

riandouglas said:

Why do cats have black and white vision while humans see (barely) in colour? Your timelines the “correct ones”? How quaint of you to mix in your ignorance of geology, cosmology, atomic theory and so on with your ignorance of evolutionary biology.

Cats can see color, almost as well as humans.

KlausH said: Cats can see color, almost as well as humans.

I didn’t know that - thanks for the correction Klaus.

Robert Byers said: Common design also would predict these trees

Please submit a tree based on Common Design for the following species: Wolf, Maned Wolf, Thylacyne, Spotted Hyena, Brown Bear, Lion, Wolverine.

Daniel said:

Robert Byers said: Common design also would predict these trees

Please submit a tree based on Common Design for the following species: Wolf, Maned Wolf, Thylacyne, Spotted Hyena, Brown Bear, Lion, Wolverine.

Common design for: Human, Chimpanzee, Great White Shark, Giant Squid, Monarch butterfly.

Leave a comment

About this Archive

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter