Creationist offers 10K to anyone who debunk Genesis account in court

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

Ethnic Vagina Finder, you sir are a complete moron.

 

[Johnny Kilroy]

if believers leave their beliefs at faith, and stop trying to mix their beliefs with science and reason, then these issues would be avoided.

people actually show all kinds of proof that there is no intelligent design, evolution being a massive one.

but anyway, one does not have a burden to prove a negative if the negative is the default of what we know. we know that a god creating the universe is not self evident, so the first move is on the believer to present some evidence. if the evidence sticks, then the person who continues to be skeptical has to answer it, otherwise the burden of proof is only on the person putting forth the original idea.

that's like saying people who believe in unicorns, and people who dont believe in unicorns are on equal footing. it really is only up to the unicorn beleivers to present evidence first, then the skeptics should answer to that evidence

I'm not sure what you mean by "mixing their beliefs with science and reason". Can you elaborate?

Also, what proof is there that there is no intelligent design? How does evolution prove that? It goes back to my question, what caused the universe to exist? What causes evolution? As a matter of fact, evolution, itself, sounds pretty intelligent. So simply saying "evolution" is not "massive" proof of lack of intelligent design. I can't agree with that.

You say God creating the universe is not self evident so does that mean the opposite is? And what is the opposite? That nothing created the universe? That's self evident to you?

So again, I ask you how do you, personally, think the universe came into existence?

I don't understand how the concept of God is so absurd yet something coming from nothing is completely logical.

 

[NZA]

I'm not sure what you mean by "mixing their beliefs with science and reason". Can you elaborate?

Also, what proof is there that there is no intelligent design? How does evolution prove that? It goes back to my question, what caused the universe to exist? What causes evolution? As a matter of fact, evolution, itself, sounds pretty intelligent. So simply saying "evolution" is not "massive" proof of lack of intelligent design. I can't agree with that.

You say God creating the universe is not self evident so does that mean the opposite is? And what is the opposite? That nothing created the universe? That's self evident to you?

So again, I ask you how do you, personally, think the universe came into existence?

I don't understand how the concept of God is so absurd yet something coming from nothing is completely logical.

faith is not challenging people to prove or disprove things in mock court battles or over wagers of money. faith is just people keeping their beliefs because they trust them. when you challenge people, you take something out of the realm of faith or trust, and put into a context similar to science or rational systems of discovery. in other words, if "people of faith" attempt to use science or reason to promote their beliefs in the public sphere, then they cannot retreat to "faith" when their belief is attacked by counter evidence or arguments. their faith ends up getting treated just like any other hypothesis.

judging by your comments on evolution, it seems you dont know much about it. i suggest looking it up before we go any further with that subject.

on the subject of "self evident", if you see a dead body, do you always assume the person was murdered, or is it possible for people to die of natural causes? the existence of a dead body is not evidence of the existence of a murderer. some people die of heart attacks...

i personally have no opinion on how the universe came into being. i dont know and am not in any good position to tell you one way or the other. i would just be bullshytting myself.

i never said the concept of god is absurd. it simply is not well founded in empirical evidence. again, as an agnostic, you supposedly are familiar with these concepts. anything i say should be quite agreeable to you, breh.

 

[Johnny Kilroy]

faith is not challenging people to prove or disprove things in mock court battles or over wagers of money. faith is just people keeping their beliefs because they trust them. when you challenge people, you take something out of the realm of faith or trust, and put into a context similar to science or rational systems of discovery. in other words, if "people of faith" attempt to use science or reason to promote their beliefs in the public sphere, then they cannot retreat to "faith" when their belief is attacked by counter evidence or arguments. their faith ends up getting treated just like any other hypothesis.

judging by your comments on evolution, it seems you dont know much about it. i suggest looking it up before we go any further with that subject.

on the subject of "self evident", if you see a dead body, do you always assume the person was murdered, or is it possible for people to die of natural causes? the existence of a dead body is not evidence of the existence of a murderer. some people die of heart attacks...

i personally have no opinion on how the universe came into being. i dont know and am not in any good position to tell you one way or the other. i would just be bullshytting myself.

i never said the concept of god is absurd. it simply is not well founded in empirical evidence. again, as an agnostic, you supposedly are familiar with these concepts. anything i say should be quite agreeable to you, breh.

I have an understanding of evolution. But to clarify I'm asking you what sparked evolution? What pushes it forward? Who/what is naturally selecting in this process of natural selection? And why? How?

Better yet, since you're the expert explain it to me in detail and I'll adjust my questions accordingly. Fair enough?

I'll agree that what this guy is doing is indeed silly seeing how it can't be "proved" either way. It's really an exercise in futility on either side IMO.

But your dead body example is a bit far fetched. Like you said, a person can die of many things, so why would I assume it was a murder? In the case I'm presenting I'm simply saying the universe exists, then asking how it got here. Either something caused its existence or nothing did or maybe it always existed. I never assumed anything though, just pointed out the options.

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

HE'S NOT THE EXPERT, BROTHER! HE'S SOME GUY ON THE INTERNET, DUDE! IF YOU WANTED AN EXPERT'S KNOWELDGE, YOU WOULD READ THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES, SOME COMMENTARIES ON IT, AND OVERVIEWS OF MODERN BIOLOGY, BROTHER! BUT THAT WOULD TAKE TIME OUT OF YOUR TROLLING REGIMEN, MEAN GENE!

 

[NZA]

I have an understanding of evolution. But to clarify I'm asking you what sparked evolution? What pushes it forward? Who/what is naturally selecting in this process of natural selection? And why? How?

Better yet, since you're the expert explain it to me in detail and I'll adjust my questions accordingly. Fair enough?

I'll agree that what this guy is doing is indeed silly seeing how it can't be "proved" either way. It's really an exercise in futility on either side IMO.

But your dead body example is a bit far fetched. Like you said, a person can die of many things, so why would I assume it was a murder? In the case I'm presenting I'm simply saying the universe exists, then asking how it got here. Either something caused its existence or nothing did or maybe it always existed. I never assumed anything though, just pointed out the options.

you say you understand evolution, and then wonder why natural selection is evidence against intelligent design...

the point of the dead body is to get you to think deeper. there is no "opposite" cause since death occurs from a multitude of things. sometimes there are no shortcuts to knowledge, just like some deaths require autopsies. ruling out one cause of death doesnt automatically give you the cause

 

[you're NOT "n!ggas"]

buddy already won. any person bringing this shyt to court is gonna have to swear in on a Bible

 

[Johnny Kilroy]

you say you understand evolution, and then wonder why natural selection is evidence against intelligent design...

That's according to definition but I'm using logic here. When evolutionists talk about evolution they tend to personify it. So even though they're claiming one thing, it certainly doesn't sound like what they claim. That's why I said evolution sounds intelligent. Evolution seems to have a plan and know what it's doing. It seems determined to achieve some sort of ultimate goal. And this observation is just based of what evolutionists say. That's why I asked you to explain it for me, I wanted to see if you would say similar things.

the point of the dead body is to get you to think deeper. there is no "opposite" cause since death occurs from a multitude of things. sometimes there are no shortcuts to knowledge, just like some deaths require autopsies. ruling out one cause of death doesnt automatically give you the cause

That's because there are many causes of death. One thing's for sure it was either a murder or it wasn't. In that regards there are 2 choices. But that "wasn't" choice can be many different things.

In my example the choices are something or nothing. That something can be many different things as well. But on the surface it's simply something or nothing which is a lot more reasonable than "murdered or not". Dead or alive would be a better comparison for you. Is the man dead or alive? Simple as that. If it's determined he's dead then we can delve into how he died just like if we determine the universe was brought into existence by something rather than nothing we can then begin to explore what that something is.

 

[Blackking]

Lets take a look at this scientifically.

If every human on earth is descended from Adam and Eve, then there should be some genetic record of that, right? I mean I'm not a geneticist, but if my wife and I had kids, and those kids and their kids incested (word?) for a thousand generations (assuming they were all somehow fertile), it'd be pretty clear that all those kids came from the same lineage, I'd think.

So can't we just compare a few people's dna and say "yes, that happened" or "no, that didn't happen"?

Eve could've been a-sexual. We're going back thousands of years. Man can't definitively prove any events going back that far. It's all best guest. Theories change or evolve all the time. Man use to think the sun revolved around the earth and this wasn't that long ago. You can't prove any thing beyond a reasonable doubt either way. It's a lose lose argument.

And if you want to break it down scientific fukk DNA we are all made up of the same atoms.

'Mitochondrial Eve': Mother of all humans lived 200,000 years ago

people actually show all kinds of proof that there is no intelligent design, evolution being a massive one.

evolution doesn't negate intelligent design.

 

[NZA]

That's according to definition but I'm using logic here. When evolutionists talk about evolution they tend to personify it. So even though they're claiming one thing, it certainly doesn't sound like what they claim. That's why I said evolution sounds intelligent. Evolution seems to have a plan and know what it's doing. It seems determined to achieve some sort of ultimate goal. And this observation is just based of what evolutionists say. That's why I asked you to explain it for me, I wanted to see if you would say similar things.



That's because there are many causes of death. One thing's for sure it was either a murder or it wasn't. In that regards there are 2 choices. But that "wasn't" choice can be many different things.

In my example the choices are something or nothing. That something can be many different things as well. But on the surface it's simply something or nothing which is a lot more reasonable than "murdered or not". Dead or alive would be a better comparison for you. Is the man dead or alive? Simple as that. If it's determined he's dead then we can delve into how he died just like if we determine the universe was brought into existence by something rather than nothing we can then begin to explore what that something is.

evolution does not sound like intelligence. it sounds like complete and utter randomness

actually, in terms of analogy, murder is a very fitting choice since it implies a person doing something to cause a state of being which is also what creating a universe would be. "dead or alive" would not work at all since the crux of the matter is not a debate on the state of the universe, but how it achieved its state.

 

[NZA]

evolution doesn't negate intelligent design.

yes it does

 

[Johnny Kilroy]

evolution does not sound like intelligence. it sounds like complete and utter randomness

actually, in terms of analogy, murder is a very fitting choice since it implies a person doing something to cause a state of being which is also what creating a universe would be. "dead or alive" would not work at all since the crux of the matter is not a debate on the state of the universe, but how it achieved its state.

Breh, explain evolution to me.

 

[NZA]

Breh, explain evolution to me.

ok, now you really are trolling me, LOL

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

some of you say that you understand evolution and then say things that clearly display you don't understand evolution..

 

[Johnny Kilroy]

ok, now you really are trolling me, LOL

some of you say that you understand evolution and then say things that clearly display you don't understand evolution..

Why don't one of you 2 experts explain it already?

HL, mang.