Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.atheism > #2116613 > unrolled thread

Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing

Started byRobert Duncan <rob-duncan32@outlook.com>
First post2016-05-31 06:58 -0400
Last post2016-06-05 01:41 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 214 — 22 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.atheism


Contents

  Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Robert Duncan <rob-duncan32@outlook.com> - 2016-05-31 06:58 -0400
    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 08:11 -0700
      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-05-31 12:42 -0700
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 13:48 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-05-31 15:59 -0500
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Kurt Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 18:33 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-05-31 14:02 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 15:54 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-05-31 16:52 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-05-31 18:34 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 20:50 -0700
                  Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 21:49 -0700
                  Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-05-31 23:16 -0700
                    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 05:57 -0700
                      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-02 14:57 -0700
                        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-02 16:37 -0700
                          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-02 20:55 -0500
                          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 19:26 -0700
                    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing John Locke <johnnydemon666@demonmail.com> - 2016-06-01 09:57 -0700
                      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 10:53 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 21:12 -0700
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing John Locke <johnnydemon666@demonmail.com> - 2016-06-01 07:14 -0700
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-06-02 23:04 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-03 00:30 -0700
      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Kurt Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 18:29 -0700
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 20:51 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-05-31 23:07 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 05:59 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 09:14 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing John Locke <johnnydemon666@demonmail.com> - 2016-06-01 10:02 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 00:59 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Davej <galt_57@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-01 07:04 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 09:16 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 13:53 -0700
                  Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 18:03 -0700
                    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 18:24 -0700
                      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 18:36 -0700
                        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 19:28 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 01:01 -0700
                  Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 01:18 -0700
                    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-02 12:37 +0000
                    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 09:21 -0700
                      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 09:52 -0700
                      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-02 12:09 -0500
                      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-02 15:00 -0700
                        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-02 16:56 -0700
                          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 18:23 -0700
                          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-02 20:57 -0500
                    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-02 14:59 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Kurt Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 16:56 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:09 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-02 21:21 -0700
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 21:06 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Kurt Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 16:57 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:10 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 07:17 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-03 07:30 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 09:53 -0700
                  Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-04 10:46 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 17:41 -0700
                  Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-04 10:44 -0700
                    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 12:35 -0700
                      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-04 23:49 -0700
                        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 01:39 -0700
      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Malcolm McMahon <malcolm.mc74@googlemail.com> - 2016-06-01 07:27 -0700
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 09:24 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 15:46 -0500
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Robert Duncan <rob-duncan32@outlook.com> - 2016-06-01 20:08 -0400
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 18:09 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 20:59 -0500
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 22:55 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 01:20 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-02 10:56 +1000
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Malcolm McMahon <malcolm.mc74@googlemail.com> - 2016-06-03 03:21 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-04 10:01 +1000
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 01:07 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 01:21 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 01:48 -0700
              "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-02 15:19 -0700
                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 16:01 -0700
                  Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-02 16:49 -0700
                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 16:03 -0700
                  Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-02 16:52 -0700
                    Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 18:21 -0700
                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Les Hellawell <les@shant.tell> - 2016-06-03 06:36 +0100
                  Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 11:46 -0400
                    Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 13:06 -0500
                      Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 17:43 -0400
                        Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 17:11 -0500
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 19:20 -0400
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-03 16:43 -0700
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 22:25 -0400
                                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 21:35 -0500
                                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-04 05:15 -0700
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 19:02 -0500
                        Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-03 16:01 -0700
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 19:02 -0500
                    Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-03 16:00 -0700
                      Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 19:04 -0500
                    Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 17:46 -0700
                    Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-06-05 01:02 -0700
                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth default <default@defaulter.net> - 2016-06-03 08:53 -0400
                  Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-03 07:32 -0700
                    Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth default <default@defaulter.net> - 2016-06-03 12:27 -0400
                    Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 17:44 -0700
                      Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Kurt Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:10 -0700
                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 11:36 -0400
                  Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 09:47 -0700
                  Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 13:07 -0500
                    Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 18:50 -0400
                      Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Don Kresch <no@spam.org> - 2016-06-03 18:01 -0500
                        Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 22:22 -0400
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 21:34 -0500
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 00:04 -0400
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 01:28 -0500
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-04 04:59 -0700
                                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 08:37 -0500
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-04 04:54 -0700
                      Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-03 16:02 -0700
                        Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 19:15 -0500
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-04 05:19 -0700
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 07:39 -0500
                        Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 22:23 -0400
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 21:36 -0500
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 00:31 -0400
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 00:14 -0500
                                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 12:04 -0400
                                  Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 12:29 -0500
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-04 05:16 -0700
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 07:43 -0500
                      Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth John Locke <johnnydemon666@demonmail.com> - 2016-06-03 16:34 -0700
                      Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 19:08 -0500
                        Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 23:01 -0400
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 00:42 -0500
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 18:47 -0400
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 19:06 -0500
                                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 00:33 -0400
                      Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-03 20:38 -0500
                        Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-03 21:06 -0500
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 23:29 -0400
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 00:58 -0500
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-04 05:09 -0700
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-04 05:06 -0700
                        Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 23:12 -0400
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-04 06:22 -0500
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Gordon <gordonlr@swbell.net> - 2016-06-04 12:36 -0500
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-04 15:32 -0500
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-04 15:35 -0700
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 19:22 -0400
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-04 16:52 -0700
                                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 21:52 -0400
                                  Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 21:00 -0500
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 19:09 -0500
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-04 20:51 -0500
                                Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth "Wm. Esque" <"Wm. Esque"@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 22:02 -0400
                                  Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 21:07 -0500
                        Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 20:53 -0700
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 01:02 -0500
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 01:05 -0500
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 19:41 -0700
                        Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Gordon <gordonlr@swbell.net> - 2016-06-04 12:49 -0500
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 13:58 -0500
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-04 15:35 -0500
                          Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-04 15:35 -0700
                            Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Gordon <gordonlr@swbell.net> - 2016-06-04 18:51 -0500
                              Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-04 19:34 -0500
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 00:41 -0700
    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 21:04 -0700
      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-05-31 23:02 -0700
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 06:00 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 09:13 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing John Locke <johnnydemon666@demonmail.com> - 2016-06-01 09:42 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-01 17:07 +0000
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 15:39 -0500
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 00:36 -0700
    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Davej <galt_57@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-01 06:28 -0700
      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 09:17 -0700
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 09:31 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Robert Duncan <rob-duncan32@outlook.com> - 2016-06-01 13:06 -0400
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Wexford Eire <wexford.eire.1798@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 10:56 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing John Locke <johnnydemon666@demonmail.com> - 2016-06-01 11:49 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 18:02 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing John Locke <johnnydemon666@demonmail.com> - 2016-06-02 07:51 -0700
                  Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-02 08:52 -0700
                  Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-02 14:52 -0700
                    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-02 16:38 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing wryan1776@gmail.com - 2016-06-02 08:52 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 18:03 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 18:22 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 18:35 -0700
                  Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 21:00 -0500
                  Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 19:24 -0700
                    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-01 22:55 -0700
                      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 01:15 -0700
                        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-02 08:38 -0700
                          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 09:11 -0700
                    Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2016-06-02 17:52 -0400
                      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Smiler <smiler@jo.king> - 2016-06-03 00:49 +0000
                        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Don Martin <drdonmartin@comcast.net> - 2016-06-03 17:36 -0400
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 18:29 -0700
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 01:04 -0700
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-02 14:49 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-02 16:38 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:05 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 19:13 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-02 21:25 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 17:33 -0700
                Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-04 10:45 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-03 05:48 -0700
              Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-03 07:31 -0700
      Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-06-02 23:16 -0700
        Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2016-06-03 00:29 -0700
          Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing hypatiab7 <hypatiab7@comcast.net> - 2016-06-05 01:00 -0700
            Re: Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing nature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 01:41 -0700

Page 4 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 11  Next page →


#2119511

From"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
Date2016-06-04 10:44 -0700
Message-ID<7Y2dnQ4w3u31js7KnZ2dnUU7-KHNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#2119108
"Cloud Hobbit" wrote in message news:5f06a3be-4254-45e8-94bb-7d36a2773c1e@googlegroups.com...
> Andrew wrote:
>> "Wexford Eire" wrote:
>>
>> > Evolution is a fact. Theories as to what have evolved into what
>> > may change, but the underlying fact of evolution remains.
>>
>> Noooooo. The "goo to you" evolution story is one of the greatest
>> falsehoods of all time.
>
> based on what peer reviewed scientific evidence?

If it is not a falsehood, then cite the peer reviewed scientific evidence
that says it is true. You can't.

>> The reason it has been accepted by so many
>> is because they have not learned to ~think~ and to question things
>> out for themselves.
>>
> That's exactly the reason why evolution is accepted, because we do think for ourselves.  It would have been so much easier to just
> reject it out of hand and say it didn't conform to the Bible.
>
> The problem is that would be denying the evidence.  The evidence proves evolution.

Then cite the peer reviewed scientific evidence that says "goo to you" evolution is true.

> It has withstood 150 years of questioning by
> people trying to figure things out for themselves.
>
> They have all come to the irrefutable position that evolution is real,

Variation and adaption is what is real.

> it happens and there is no evidence of anything else at work.  It is observable, and testable.

The 'goo to you' story is neither observable or testable.

> Nothing about God of the Bible is.  In
> fact Jesus might scold you a little if you even ask for evidence.

No, the Bible say to -->"Prove all things" 1 Thess 5:21. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2119598

Fromnature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-04 12:35 -0700
Message-ID<3ac12de9-a310-43d5-8ee5-a6fdee69ccd2@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2119511
On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 10:44:11 AM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:
> "Cloud Hobbit" wrote in message news:5f06a3be-4254-45e8-94bb-7d36a2773c1e@googlegroups.com...
> > Andrew wrote:
> >> "Wexford Eire" wrote:
> >>
> >> > Evolution is a fact. Theories as to what have evolved into what
> >> > may change, but the underlying fact of evolution remains.
> >>
> >> Noooooo. The "goo to you" evolution story is one of the greatest
> >> falsehoods of all time.
> >
> > based on what peer reviewed scientific evidence?
> 
> If it is not a falsehood, then cite the peer reviewed scientific evidence
> that says it is true. You can't.
> 
> >> The reason it has been accepted by so many
> >> is because they have not learned to ~think~ and to question things
> >> out for themselves.
> >>
> > That's exactly the reason why evolution is accepted, because we do think for ourselves.  It would have been so much easier to just
> > reject it out of hand and say it didn't conform to the Bible.
> >

.> > The problem is that would be denying the evidence.  The evidence proves evolution.
> 
.> Then cite the peer reviewed scientific evidence that says "goo to you" evolution is true.

Cite a peer reviewed scientific journal article in which the phrase "goo to you"
even appears:




Seth

> 
> > It has withstood 150 years of questioning by
> > people trying to figure things out for themselves.
> >
> > They have all come to the irrefutable position that evolution is real,
> 
> Variation and adaption is what is real.
> 
> > it happens and there is no evidence of anything else at work.  It is observable, and testable.
> 
> The 'goo to you' story is neither observable or testable.
> 
> > Nothing about God of the Bible is.  In
> > fact Jesus might scold you a little if you even ask for evidence.
> 
> No, the Bible say to -->"Prove all things" 1 Thess 5:21.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2119954

From"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
Date2016-06-04 23:49 -0700
Message-ID<3oydnbwYUrD8Vs7KnZ2dnUU7-aXNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#2119598
"nature bats last" wrote in message news:3ac12de9-a310-43d5-8ee5-a6fdee69ccd2@googlegroups.com...
> Andrew wrote:
>> "Cloud Hobbit" wrote:
>> > Andrew wrote:
>> >> "Wexford Eire" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Evolution is a fact. Theories as to what have evolved into what
>> >> > may change, but the underlying fact of evolution remains.
>> >>
>> >> Noooooo. The "goo to you" evolution story is one of the greatest
>> >> falsehoods of all time.
>> >
>> > based on what peer reviewed scientific evidence?
>>
>> If it is not a falsehood, then cite the peer reviewed scientific evidence
>> that says it is true. You can't.
>>
>> >> The reason it has been accepted by so many
>> >> is because they have not learned to ~think~ and to question things
>> >> out for themselves.
>> >>
>> > That's exactly the reason why evolution is accepted, because we do
>> > think for ourselves.  It would have been so much easier to just
>> > reject it out of hand and say it didn't conform to the Bible.
>> >
>
> .> > The problem is that would be denying the evidence.  The evidence proves evolution.
>>
> .> Then cite the peer reviewed scientific evidence that says "goo to you" evolution is true.
>
> Cite a peer reviewed scientific journal article in
> which the phrase "goo to you" even appears:

No problem --> http://alturl.com/m23jg

The  "goo to you" phrase is a simplification of
what is taught, and what the gullible believe in
the area of origins.

Do you not believe it? Then what is the only
other option?

Creation.

If  "goo to you" is not true..then you need to
consider Creation as the methodology of our
origins.

Can you think of any other option?

No. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2119989

Fromnature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-05 01:39 -0700
Message-ID<fb463118-9565-4011-98e6-0d86e537f854@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2119954
On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 11:49:09 PM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:
> "nature bats last" wrote in message news:3ac12de9-a310-43d5-8ee5-a6fdee69ccd2@googlegroups.com...
> > Andrew wrote:
> >> "Cloud Hobbit" wrote:
> >> > Andrew wrote:
> >> >> "Wexford Eire" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Evolution is a fact. Theories as to what have evolved into what
> >> >> > may change, but the underlying fact of evolution remains.
> >> >>
> >> >> Noooooo. The "goo to you" evolution story is one of the greatest
> >> >> falsehoods of all time.
> >> >
> >> > based on what peer reviewed scientific evidence?
> >>
> >> If it is not a falsehood, then cite the peer reviewed scientific evidence
> >> that says it is true. You can't.
> >>
> >> >> The reason it has been accepted by so many
> >> >> is because they have not learned to ~think~ and to question things
> >> >> out for themselves.
> >> >>
> >> > That's exactly the reason why evolution is accepted, because we do
> >> > think for ourselves.  It would have been so much easier to just
> >> > reject it out of hand and say it didn't conform to the Bible.
> >> >
> >
> > .> > The problem is that would be denying the evidence.  The evidence proves evolution.
> >>
> > .> Then cite the peer reviewed scientific evidence that says "goo to you" evolution is true.
> >

.> > Cite a peer reviewed scientific journal article in
.> > which the phrase "goo to you" even appears:
> 
.> No problem --> http://alturl.com/m23jg

Actually, you do appear to have a problem.  Specifically,
understanding the phrase "peer reviewed scientific journal article".
A list of books and creationist websites and letter-to- the-editor
opinions pieces is no such thing.

> 
.> The  "goo to you" phrase is a simplification of
.> what is taught, and what the gullible believe in
.> the area of origins.
> 
.> Do you not believe it? 

What I do believe, what I in fact know, is that in over fifty
years of reading science, from popularizations to, yes
."peer reviewed scientific journal articles", I have yet to
come across the phrase "goo to you".

Which means that it is not something that scientists involve themselves with,
but rather a creationist straw man.

Come back when you can state it both succinctly and accurately
in terms that involve actual science.


Seth



> Then what is the only
> other option?
> 
> Creation.
> 
> If  "goo to you" is not true..then you need to
> consider Creation as the methodology of our
> origins.
> 
> Can you think of any other option?
> 
> No.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117355

FromMalcolm McMahon <malcolm.mc74@googlemail.com>
Date2016-06-01 07:27 -0700
Message-ID<b00d86f3-a0bd-40ff-b003-ad2068b54084@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2116695
On Tuesday, 31 May 2016 16:11:21 UTC+1, Wexford Eire  wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 31, 2016 at 6:58:20 AM UTC-4, Robert Duncan wrote:
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
> 
> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.

Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion too.

The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to create humans.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117430

From"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
Date2016-06-01 09:24 -0700
Message-ID<aKudnegTOs3TkdLKnZ2dnUU7-dXNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#2117355
"Malcolm McMahon" wrote in message news:b00d86f3-a0bd-40ff-b003-ad2068b54084@googlegroups.com...
> Wexford Eire  wrote:
>> Robert Duncan wrote:
>> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
>>
>> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
>
> Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion too.
>
> The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to create humans.

Yes, because this is what happened long ago:

"God created man in His own image, in the image
 of God created He him; male and female created
 He them."                  ~ God

Male and female.

Irreducibly complex.

Created by our most awesome and wonderful Creator . . .
                                      God. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117614

FromMitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net>
Date2016-06-01 15:46 -0500
Message-ID<XnsA61AA0A836841noemailattnet@216.166.97.131>
In reply to#2117430
"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> wrote in
news:aKudnegTOs3TkdLKnZ2dnUU7-dXNnZ2d@earthlink.com: 

> "Malcolm McMahon" wrote in message
> news:b00d86f3-a0bd-40ff-b003-ad2068b54084@googlegroups.com... 
>> Wexford Eire  wrote:
>>> Robert Duncan wrote:
>>> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
>>>
>>> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
>>
>> Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by
>> anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion
>> too. 
>>
>> The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to
>> create humans. 
> 
> Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
> 
> "God created man in His own image, in the image
>  of God created He him; male and female created
>  He them."                  ~ God



And God said, Let us make man in OUR image, 
after OUR likeness" Genesis. 1:26


  So, like, what other gods were there?







 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117616

FromRobert Duncan <rob-duncan32@outlook.com>
Date2016-06-01 20:08 -0400
Message-ID<Y_SdnfF2l9pH0dLKnZ2dnUU7-a3NnZ2d@supernews.com>
In reply to#2117614
On 6/1/2016 4:46 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
> "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> wrote in
> news:aKudnegTOs3TkdLKnZ2dnUU7-dXNnZ2d@earthlink.com:
>
>> "Malcolm McMahon" wrote in message
>> news:b00d86f3-a0bd-40ff-b003-ad2068b54084@googlegroups.com...
>>> Wexford Eire  wrote:
>>>> Robert Duncan wrote:
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
>>>>
>>>> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
>>>
>>> Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by
>>> anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion
>>> too.
>>>
>>> The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to
>>> create humans.
>>
>> Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
>>
>> "God created man in His own image, in the image
>>   of God created He him; male and female created
>>   He them."                  ~ God
>
>
>
> And God said, Let us make man in OUR image,
> after OUR likeness" Genesis. 1:26
>
>
> So, like, what other gods were there?

It's not meant for you to know.

"Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs."
  (Matthew 7:6)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117759

From"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
Date2016-06-01 18:09 -0700
Message-ID<bL-dnXSrC9OkGtLKnZ2dnUU7-RXNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#2117614
"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message news:XnsA61AA0A836841noemailattnet@216.166.97.131...
> "Andrew" wrote:   >
>> "Malcolm McMahon" wrote:
>>> Wexford Eire  wrote:
>>>> Robert Duncan wrote:
>>>> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
>>>>
>>>> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
>>>
>>> Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by
>>> anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion
>>> too.
>>>
>>> The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to
>>> create humans.
>>
>> Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
>>
>> "God created man in His own image, in the image
>>  of God created He him; male and female created
>>  He them."                  ~ God
>
> And God said, Let us make man in OUR
> image, after OUR likeness" Genesis. 1:26

We have an awesome Creator. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117781

FromMitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net>
Date2016-06-01 20:59 -0500
Message-ID<XnsA61AD5BDC44E5noemailattnet@216.166.97.131>
In reply to#2117759
"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> wrote in
news:bL-dnXSrC9OkGtLKnZ2dnUU7-RXNnZ2d@earthlink.com: 

> "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
> news:XnsA61AA0A836841noemailattnet@216.166.97.131... 
>> "Andrew" wrote:   >
>>> "Malcolm McMahon" wrote:
>>>> Wexford Eire  wrote:
>>>>> Robert Duncan wrote:
>>>>> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
>>>>>
>>>>> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by
>>>> anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion
>>>> too.
>>>>
>>>> The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to
>>>> create humans.
>>>
>>> Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
>>>
>>> "God created man in His own image, in the image
>>>  of God created He him; male and female created
>>>  He them."                  ~ God
>>
>> And God said, Let us make man in OUR
>> image, after OUR likeness" Genesis. 1:26


    Evasion noted. 

    Who else was your god referring by OUR image
and OUR likeness?



> 
> We have an awesome Creator. 
> 
> 
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117902

From"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
Date2016-06-01 22:55 -0700
Message-ID<y-qdnaMrVv7TV9LKnZ2dnUU7-QfNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#2117781
"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message news:XnsA61AD5BDC44E5noemailattnet@216.166.97.131...
> "Andrew" wrote:
>> "Mitchell Holman" wrote:
>>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>>> "Malcolm McMahon" wrote:
>>>>> Wexford Eire  wrote:
>>>>>> Robert Duncan wrote:
>>>>>> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
>>>>>>
>>>>>> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by
>>>>> anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion
>>>>> too.
>>>>>
>>>>> The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to
>>>>> create humans.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
>>>>
>>>> "God created man in His own image, in the image
>>>>  of God created He him; male and female created
>>>>  He them."                  ~ God
>>>
>>> And God said, Let us make man in OUR
>>> image, after OUR likeness" Genesis. 1:26
>
>    Evasion noted.
>
>    Who else was your god referring by OUR image
> and OUR likeness?

I have no 'god'..only the awesome *God*

"There are three that bear witness in heaven: the
 Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these
 three are one."              ~ 1 John 5:7 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117928

FromCloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-02 01:20 -0700
Message-ID<71b3670b-dba8-4be5-876f-9b82e5132412@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2117781
On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 6:59:34 PM UTC-7, Mitchell Holman wrote:
> "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> wrote in
> news:bL-dnXSrC9OkGtLKnZ2dnUU7-RXNnZ2d@earthlink.com: 
> 
> > "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
> > news:XnsA61AA0A836841noemailattnet@216.166.97.131... 
> >> "Andrew" wrote:   >
> >>> "Malcolm McMahon" wrote:
> >>>> Wexford Eire  wrote:
> >>>>> Robert Duncan wrote:
> >>>>> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
> >>>>>
> >>>>> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
> >>>>
> >>>> Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by
> >>>> anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion
> >>>> too.
> >>>>
> >>>> The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to
> >>>> create humans.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
> >>>
> >>> "God created man in His own image, in the image
> >>>  of God created He him; male and female created
> >>>  He them."                  ~ God
> >>
> >> And God said, Let us make man in OUR
> >> image, after OUR likeness" Genesis. 1:26
> 
> 
>     Evasion noted. 
> 
>     Who else was your god referring by OUR image
> and OUR likeness?
> 
> 
> 
Has nothing to do with the truth of evolution and what you think might be going on if not evolution?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117746

From"Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk>
Date2016-06-02 10:56 +1000
Message-ID<dr9ei0F9e4U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#2117430
On 02/06/2016 02:24, Andrew wrote:
> "Malcolm McMahon" wrote in message
> news:b00d86f3-a0bd-40ff-b003-ad2068b54084@googlegroups.com...
>> Wexford Eire  wrote:
>>> Robert Duncan wrote:
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
>>>
>>> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
>>
>> Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by
>> anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion
>> too.
>>
>> The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to
>> create humans.
>
> Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
>
> "God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He
> him; male and female created He them."                  ~ God
>
> Male and female.
>
> Irreducibly complex.
>
> Created by our most awesome and wonderful Creator . . . God.
>
>

Irreducibly complex?

Asexual reproduction would have been much easier and much less complex ....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2118687

FromMalcolm McMahon <malcolm.mc74@googlemail.com>
Date2016-06-03 03:21 -0700
Message-ID<30cb0dbd-41ff-484a-a8fd-25407f8056d3@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2117746
On Thursday, 2 June 2016 01:56:36 UTC+1, Alex W.  wrote:
> On 02/06/2016 02:24, Andrew wrote:
> > "Malcolm McMahon" wrote in message
> > news:b00d86f3-a0bd-40ff-b003-ad2068b54084@googlegroups.com...
> >> Wexford Eire  wrote:
> >>> Robert Duncan wrote:
> >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
> >>>
> >>> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
> >>
> >> Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by
> >> anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion
> >> too.
> >>
> >> The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to
> >> create humans.
> >
> > Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
> >
> > "God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He
> > him; male and female created He them."                  ~ God
> >
> > Male and female.
> >
> > Irreducibly complex.
> >
> > Created by our most awesome and wonderful Creator . . . God.
> >
> >
> 
> Irreducibly complex?
> 

Not really. Even today there are people of intermediate gender.


> Asexual reproduction would have been much easier and much less complex 


But guess what? Sexual reproduction speeds evolution.

....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2119079

From"Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk>
Date2016-06-04 10:01 +1000
Message-ID<drek1qF1gjhU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#2118687
On 03/06/2016 20:21, Malcolm McMahon wrote:
> On Thursday, 2 June 2016 01:56:36 UTC+1, Alex W.  wrote:
>> On 02/06/2016 02:24, Andrew wrote:
>>> "Malcolm McMahon" wrote in message
>>> news:b00d86f3-a0bd-40ff-b003-ad2068b54084@googlegroups.com...
>>>> Wexford Eire  wrote:
>>>>> Robert Duncan wrote:
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
>>>>>
>>>>> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by
>>>> anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion
>>>> too.
>>>>
>>>> The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to
>>>> create humans.
>>>
>>> Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
>>>
>>> "God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He
>>> him; male and female created He them."                  ~ God
>>>
>>> Male and female.
>>>
>>> Irreducibly complex.
>>>
>>> Created by our most awesome and wonderful Creator . . . God.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Irreducibly complex?
>>
>
> Not really. Even today there are people of intermediate gender.

I'd prefer indeterminate or intersex -- intermediate implies a valid 
third sex which would be hard to confirm given that even true 
hermaphrodites will fall on the side of one sex or the other on some of 
the criteria used.


>
>
>> Asexual reproduction would have been much easier and much less complex
>
>
> But guess what? Sexual reproduction speeds evolution.
>

It does indeed, and that is why it is the dominant form of reproduction.

But the question was about irreducible complexity, not the most 
successful or necessary complexity.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117924

FromCloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-02 01:07 -0700
Message-ID<1f3317aa-2229-4202-b17e-f3a7f6be9ee0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2117430
On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 9:24:49 AM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:
> "Malcolm McMahon" wrote in message news:b00d86f3-a0bd-40ff-b003-ad2068b54084@googlegroups.com...
> > Wexford Eire  wrote:
> >> Robert Duncan wrote:
> >> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
> >>
> >> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
> >
> > Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion too.
> >
> > The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to create humans.
> 
> Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
> 
> "God created man in His own image, in the image
>  of God created He him; male and female created
>  He them."                  ~ God
> 
> Male and female.
> 
> Irreducibly complex.
> 
> Created by our most awesome and wonderful Creator . . .
>                                       God.

What a lovely little fairy tale in nice language.  

No such thing as irreducibly complex.  Things are as complex as they need to be, no more, no less.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117929

Fromnature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-02 01:21 -0700
Message-ID<a89dfaa9-2a68-4cf4-a541-22b4a1877361@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2117924
On Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 1:07:08 AM UTC-7, Cloud Hobbit wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 9:24:49 AM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:
> > "Malcolm McMahon" wrote in message news:b00d86f3-a0bd-40ff-b003-ad2068b54084@googlegroups.com...
> > > Wexford Eire  wrote:
> > >> Robert Duncan wrote:
> > >> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
> > >>
> > >> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
> > >
> > > Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion too.
> > >
> > > The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to create humans.
> > 
> > Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
> > 
> > "God created man in His own image, in the image
> >  of God created He him; male and female created
> >  He them."                  ~ God
> > 
> > Male and female.
> > 
> > Irreducibly complex.
> > 
> > Created by our most awesome and wonderful Creator . . .
> >                                       God.
> 
> What a lovely little fairy tale in nice language.  
> 
> No such thing as irreducibly complex.  Things are as complex as they need to be, no more, no less.

"Irreducible complexity" is one of those phrases, like
"genetic limits" and "specified information" and
"complex specified information" that Andrew has been 
challenged many many many times to define in his 
own words.

Challenges which he has ignored an equal number of times.

Obviously, this speaks for itself.


Seth

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2117935

Fromnature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-02 01:48 -0700
Message-ID<2b6de77a-ef0e-4dc1-a2b2-62e320e69df4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2117929
On Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 1:21:55 AM UTC-7, nature bats last wrote:
> On Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 1:07:08 AM UTC-7, Cloud Hobbit wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 9:24:49 AM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:
> > > "Malcolm McMahon" wrote in message news:b00d86f3-a0bd-40ff-b003-ad2068b54084@googlegroups.com...
> > > > Wexford Eire  wrote:
> > > >> Robert Duncan wrote:
> > > >> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znXF0S6D_Ts
> > > >>
> > > >> YAWN. Evolution is a fact, not a religion. Grow up, video-boy.
> > > >
> > > > Hmmm.. Some people kind of _turn_ it into a religion by anthropomorphising it. Believing in "mother" nature is a religion too.
> > > >
> > > > The most pernicious form is the belief that evolution set out to create humans.
> > > 
> > > Yes, because this is what happened long ago:
> > > 
> > > "God created man in His own image, in the image
> > >  of God created He him; male and female created
> > >  He them."                  ~ God
> > > 
> > > Male and female.
> > > 
> > > Irreducibly complex.
> > > 
> > > Created by our most awesome and wonderful Creator . . .
> > >                                       God.
> > 
> > What a lovely little fairy tale in nice language.  
> > 
> > No such thing as irreducibly complex.  Things are as complex as they need to be, no more, no less.
> 

.> "Irreducible complexity" is one of those phrases, like
.> "genetic limits" and "specified information" and
.> "complex specified information" that Andrew has been 
.> challenged many many many times to define in his 
.> own words.
> 
.> Challenges which he has ignored an equal number of times.

However, for inquiring minds...

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity#Response_of_the_scientific_community

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe.html


Seth

> 
> Obviously, this speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> Seth

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2118362 — "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth

From"Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
Date2016-06-02 15:19 -0700
Subject"Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth
Message-ID<8eGdndU83IBzLc3KnZ2dnUU7-bPNnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#2117929
"nature bats last" wrote in message news:a89dfaa9-2a68-4cf4-a541-22b4a1877361@googlegroups.com...

> "Irreducible complexity" is one of those phrases, like
> "genetic limits" and "specified information" and
> "complex specified information" that Andrew has been
> challenged many many many times to define in his
> own words.

"Something would be irreducibly complex if it
 is composed of multiple interacting parts, each
 of which contribute to its effective functioning.

 Where the removal of any one of the parts will
 cause it to cease to function effectively."

                            ~ Andrew


In the biological world there are myriads of
irreducibly complex systems and structures.

All of the biological parts of these systems
and structures must be in place at the exact
same time in order for these systems to do
what they are suposed to do.

More powerful evidence for creation by
a most awesome and wonderful Creator
for those who want to know the truth.


Andrew 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#2118402 — Re: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth

Fromnature bats last <seqklogw@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-02 16:01 -0700
SubjectRe: "Irreducible complexity". . for those who want to know the truth
Message-ID<f3f6f9e3-bae0-4ad9-9c09-f42d280ab9dd@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#2118362
On Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 3:19:29 PM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:
> "nature bats last" wrote in message news:a89dfaa9-2a68-4cf4-a541-22b4a1877361@googlegroups.com...
> 
> > "Irreducible complexity" is one of those phrases, like
> > "genetic limits" and "specified information" and
> > "complex specified information" that Andrew has been
> > challenged many many many times to define in his
> > own words.
>
 
.> "Something would be irreducibly complex if it
.>  is composed of multiple interacting parts, each
.>  of which contribute to its effective functioning.
> 
.>  Where the removal of any one of the parts will
.>  cause it to cease to function effectively."
> 
.>                             ~ Andrew

Congratulations; you're now a Class IV Googlicator.
> 
> 

.> In the biological world there are myriads of
.> irreducibly complex systems and structures.

"Myriads", are there?

Actually....no:


  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity#Response_of_the_scientific_community 



  http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB200_1.html 

  http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/DI/clot/Clotting.html 

  http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB301.html 


   http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ICsilly.html 

   http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/review.html 

  http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity 

And of course no on says it quite like ol' PZ:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2014/04/25/irreducible-complexity-again/



Seth


> 
> All of the biological parts of these systems
> and structures must be in place at the exact
> same time in order for these systems to do
> what they are suposed to do.
> 
> More powerful evidence for creation by
> a most awesome and wonderful Creator
> for those who want to know the truth.
> 
> 
> Andrew

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 4 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 11  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.atheism


csiph-web