Archive for nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Nglreturns is a forum to discuss religion, philosophy, ethics etc...

NGLReturns Daily Quiz - Play here!
 



       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> All faiths and none
Farmer Geddon

Evolution is a fact...

... not a "theory".

We all know the old creationist adage which claims evolution is simply just another “theory,” disqualifying it from being reliable as factual evidence.

Probably the most frustrating aspect of this argument is that it reveals the creationist’s lack of understanding of what the word “theory” means when applied to science – or most things in the real world for that matter.

It’s that misunderstanding that reveals itself in the video below when a student questions her professor, asking, “Why should we base the validity of all of our life’s beliefs on a theory?”

Needless to say, he was ready with an answer. Think he got through to her?


Link
bnabernard

Which leaves us with the question, is god evolving a step ahead.
It's not hard to fathom, Dan Dare, the mobile phone, oh how I remember creating the first computor room in cornhill, just up from the bank of england, a whole room with humidistats and air purifiers just to have less than what I got on my lap, teminater and now the 3d printer, where will they go.
Let us make man in our image  

bernard (hug)
Shaker

Re: Evolution is a fact...

Farmer Geddon wrote:
... not a "theory".


If we're going to be super-accurate we'd have to say: actually, it's both - evolution happens, it's an observable fact, but it's also a theory because that part, the theory side of things, refers to the conceptual framework of explanations for the observed facts.

Quote:
Probably the most frustrating aspect of this argument is that it reveals the creationist’s lack of understanding of what the word “theory” means when applied to science – or most things in the real world for that matter.


True enough. As anybody who has ever tried to discuss evolution with creationists will tell you, if I had a pound for every time I've heard somebody demonstrate their complete ignorance of what the word means in a scientific context, I'd be writing this in my beach-house on a Caribbean island while being served pink drinks with little umbrellas in by Aria Giovanni in a bikini.

There are a few tiny pockets of unusually exotic animals living wild in Britain, non-native species - wallabies spring to mind. (I'm told that there's a population of raccoons somewhere in Leicestershire). We know that in at least some cases some of these wild animals have come to be wild because they were initially kept as domestic pets, especially in the 1960s and 1970s when there was a vogue for such things, which either escaped or were deliberately dumped. This could explain why there have been (numerous but so far unconfirmed and uncorroborated) reports of large wild cats roaming free in various parts of Britain.

I mention this only because it's a useful analogy for the way in which - unfortunately - scientific terms also sometimes break out of their enclosures and get into the world at large. When this happens it almost always ends in the meaning of the word being bastardised and coming to mean something very different, sometimes diametrically opposed, to its strict scientific meaning. It happened with schizophrenia, it happened with what used to be called manic depression and it's definitely happened with theory. I suppose the root cause is that while scientists are used to using terms with a very high degree of conceptual rigour and technical precision and accuracy, the general public are not: so you end up with a situation where, for example, schizophrenic in the popular usage comes to mean having a split personality. It doesn't mean anything of the kind. Manic depression doesn't mean 'unusually severe or intense depression' and theory doesn't mean 'hunch.'

Even the first three paragraphs of something as easy to find as Wikipedia say this:

Quote:
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method, and repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. As with most (if not all) forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive power and explanatory force.

The strength of a scientific theory is related to the diversity of phenomena it can explain, and to its elegance and simplicity (Occam's razor). As additional scientific evidence is gathered, a scientific theory may be rejected or modified if it does not fit the new empirical findings- in such circumstances, a more accurate theory is then desired. In certain cases, the less-accurate unmodified scientific theory can still be treated as a theory if it is useful (due to its sheer simplicity) as an approximation under specific conditions (e.g. Newton's laws of motion as an approximation to special relativity at velocities which are small relative to the speed of light).

Scientific theories are testable and make falsifiable predictions. They describe the causal elements responsible for a particular natural phenomenon, and are used to explain and predict aspects of the physical universe or specific areas of inquiry (e.g. electricity, chemistry, astronomy). Scientists use theories as a foundation to gain further scientific knowledge, as well as to accomplish goals such as inventing technology or curing disease. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. This is significantly different from the common usage of the word "theory", which implies that something is a guess (i.e., unsubstantiated and speculative).


Now, I suppose you could argue that if you're not tremendously well up on philosophy you might not know beforehand what inductive reasoning or Occam's Razor are, but you could look those up - they're essentially very simple concepts in their own right. Perhaps it's just me but I don't think there's anything in that quote which presents insuperable obstacles, surely.

Good video - I hadn't seen that one before.
Powwow

Too funny Shaker. Like you would move to my side of the pond and move closer to the equator. If you can't stand the warmth of the sun in summer on your Island forget about enjoying yourself in  our winter playground. What would you do man, hide inside 24/7 sitting in front of an air conditioner?


http://www.amishhandcraftedfurnit..._woodworking/shaker_hall_seat.jpg
Shaker



Which thread are you replying to here? We were discussing evolution  
Farmer Geddon

I doubt you got though to her....
bnabernard

I traced evolution all the way back to 'potential'  

bernard (hug)
bnabernard

No realy I traced it back to nothing, it was always there is always there and will always be there, nothing the non thing that is everything.

bernard (hug)
Farmer Geddon

The thing y'all are missing is the zombiefied way she asked the questions..  its almost as if she doesn't have a fuckin' clue about what she is talking about.. she is the sad puppet of Christ..
Farmer Geddon

By the way..  did you actually watch the video Steve/'shaker'

Is what he claimed wrong?
JamesJah

I can prove this was created.


(  
Leonard James

JamesJah wrote:
I can prove this was created.


(  


Splendid! Let's hear your 'proof' ... assuming you mean created by "God".
JamesJah

Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
I can prove this was created.


(  


Splendid! Let's hear your 'proof' ... assuming you mean created by "God".


He gave me the bits and I created it.

In fact I can create them all shapes and sizes.



Leonard James

JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
I can prove this was created.


(  


Splendid! Let's hear your 'proof' ... assuming you mean created by "God".


He gave me the bits and I created it.

In fact I can create them all shapes and sizes.





I remember now why I stopped posting to you!  
JamesJah

These twigs are also created by the invisible power, in imitation of the master builder.



Click to see full size image


JamesJah

Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
I can prove this was created.


(  


Splendid! Let's hear your 'proof' ... assuming you mean created by "God".


He gave me the bits and I created it.

In fact I can create them all shapes and sizes.





I remember now why I stopped posting to you!  


Have you no love for reality?

Alice in wonderland is for the mushroom eaters.

Here is a real world that is going to replace this fictitious one.

It will not have ego eccentrics who keep deceiving the masses, and trying to frighten the life out of them with their mass destruction weapons.



Any foreran power that can transmit their populace into a human most certainly can overcome any foolish people who teach that they evolved, think about it????
Leonard James

JamesJah wrote:


Have you no love for reality?

Alice in wonderland is for the mushroom eaters.

Here is a real world that is going to replace this fictitious one.

It will not have ego eccentrics who keep deceiving the masses, and trying to frighten the life out of them with their mass destruction weapons.



Any foreran power that can transmit their populace into a human most certainly can overcome any foolish people who teach that they evolved, think about it????


Blah, rubbish, blah, rot, blah addled thinking, blah, religious nonsense, blah, ad infinitum.  
JamesJah

Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:


Have you no love for reality?

Alice in wonderland is for the mushroom eaters.

Here is a real world that is going to replace this fictitious one.

It will not have ego eccentrics who keep deceiving the masses, and trying to frighten the life out of them with their mass destruction weapons.



Any foreran power that can transmit their populace into a human most certainly can overcome any foolish people who teach that they evolved, think about it????


Blah, rubbish, blah, rot, blah addled thinking, blah, religious nonsense, blah, ad infinitum.  


You have the same problem as the rest of mankind who keep saying when did we see you?

How do the Americans use their war machine on some one they cannot see?

Is there a answer to that one?
Leonard James

[quote="JamesJah:120249"]
Leonard James wrote:

You have the same problem as the rest of mankind who keep saying when did we see you?



I don't have any problems in this respect, James. YOU are the one with the problems, and they are of your own making.

You have allowed your mind to become besotted with religious nonsense and are now incapable of thinking clearly.
JamesJah

[quote="Leonard James:120250"]
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:

You have the same problem as the rest of mankind who keep saying when did we see you?



I don't have any problems in this respect, James. YOU are the one with the problems, and they are of your own making.

You have allowed your mind to become besotted with religious nonsense and are now incapable of thinking clearly.


I have not yet met any one who has no faith in their creator, who is not the most confused as to what happens next.

The worst type of science I have come across, is the science that says things can make themselves,  there is no law for such foolishness.

There is now some science on utube that shows how things can be created,
trentvoyager

Quote:
The worst type of science I have come across, is the science that says things can make themselves,  there is no law for such foolishness.



But aren't you just going to get into an argument about the nature of the infinite regress theory ?[/code]
cyberman

trentvoyager wrote:
Quote:
The worst type of science I have come across, is the science that says things can make themselves,  there is no law for such foolishness.



But aren't you just going to get into an argument about the nature of the infinite regress theory ?[/code]


Do you believe in an infinite regression of causes, tv?
trentvoyager

cyberman wrote:
trentvoyager wrote:
Quote:
The worst type of science I have come across, is the science that says things can make themselves,  there is no law for such foolishness.



But aren't you just going to get into an argument about the nature of the infinite regress theory ?[/code]


Do you believe in an infinite regression of causes, tv?


Don't know - gives me brain ache - I just know that I can't see why the argument holds water just because somewhere along the line you place the concept of God into the equation.  

Why all of a sudden does an exemption clause pop into existence?

If you can argue that the full stop in regress occurs at the point "God" enters the equation, then the argument can be made elsewhere in the chain, even if that elsewhere (in my brain) is at present unknown and unspecified.
JamesJah

The big brain teaser is, what are you?
Shaker

cyberman wrote:
trentvoyager wrote:
Quote:
The worst type of science I have come across, is the science that says things can make themselves,  there is no law for such foolishness.



But aren't you just going to get into an argument about the nature of the infinite regress theory ?[/code]


Do you believe in an infinite regression of causes, tv?

An infinite regression of causes is a bit of an irrelevance, since it's something utterly beyond any human brain and its powers, at least for now.

The real question is why some people seem to need to think that a first cause, if there even was such a thing, was/is a person-like, personalistic entity with clear analogies to human beings, human likes, dislikes and other emotions.

Occam's Razor has a simple answer to that question, of course, which satisfies me perfectly. It's for those who think that a first cause (itewsat) is in a position to dislike homosexuals and cheeseburgers and to like being kind to kittens et cetera to defend their position.
cyberman

Shaker wrote:
some people seem to need to think....


When you say "seem to need to think", do you mean "think"?

Actually, my religion does not teach that God is a person-like thing with human passions and preferences. Also, not sitting on a cloud.
Shaker

cyberman wrote:
When you say "seem to need to think", do you mean "think"?

Yes, but the thinking of X seems to be born out of a need to think X if X is so signally unsupported by any evidence, reason and logic. Or even clear definition to start off with, for that matter.

Quote:
Actually, my religion does not teach that God is a person-like thing with human passions and preferences. Also, not sitting on a cloud.

I never mentioned clouds.

Unless you consider yourself a deist these days rather than a theist, theism by definition does maintain that its version of a deity is personalistic and all theistic language reflects that.
cyberman

Shaker wrote:
cyberman wrote:
When you say "seem to need to think", do you mean "think"?

Yes, but the thinking of X seems to be born out of a need to think X if X is so signally unsupported by any evidence, reason and logic. Or even clear definition to start off with, for that matter.

Quote:
Actually, my religion does not teach that God is a person-like thing with human passions and preferences. Also, not sitting on a cloud.

I never mentioned clouds.

Unless you consider yourself a deist these days rather than a theist, theism by definition does maintain that its version of a deity is personalistic and all theistic language reflects that.


Aquinas teaches that God is without parts and passions, and that this (among other things) makes him very different from a person. Possibly you are gettng confused by the fact that we use language like "him". Easy mistake to make, but the fact that we use "him" doesn't mean we think God is a male human.
JamesJah

The discovery in nature what science said was impossible should have taught them something.

The rotary engine discovered as the flagellum can not evolve in stages so has to have had a creator, but then the same goes for metamorphoses, does it not?



Click to see full size image
cyberman

JamesJah wrote:
The
The rotary engine discovered as the flagellum can not evolve in stages so has to have had a creator, but then the same goes for metamorphoses, does it not?
   


It does not, I think. Creationists used to say this about eyeballs. It just isn't so - these things can indeed develop by many small degrees.
JamesJah

cyberman wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
The
The rotary engine discovered as the flagellum can not evolve in stages so has to have had a creator, but then the same goes for metamorphoses, does it not?
   


It does not, I think. Creationists used to say this about eyeballs. It just isn't so - these things can indeed develop by many small degrees.


Which small degree came first?

The armature, the stator, the power sauce, the flagellum or the baring's?

Which bit can it do without while it is waiting for the other bits????

Which came first the caterpillar or the butterfly, not to mention the egg?
cyberman

JamesJah wrote:
cyberman wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
The
The rotary engine discovered as the flagellum can not evolve in stages so has to have had a creator, but then the same goes for metamorphoses, does it not?
   


It does not, I think. Creationists used to say this about eyeballs. It just isn't so - these things can indeed develop by many small degrees.


Which small degree came first?

The armature, the stator, the power sauce, the flagellum or the baring's?

Which bit can it do without while it is waiting for the other bits????

Which came first the caterpillar or the butterfly, not to mention the egg?


Just as with chickens, the egg came first.
JamesJah

cyberman wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
cyberman wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
The
The rotary engine discovered as the flagellum can not evolve in stages so has to have had a creator, but then the same goes for metamorphoses, does it not?
   


It does not, I think. Creationists used to say this about eyeballs. It just isn't so - these things can indeed develop by many small degrees.


Which small degree came first?

The armature, the stator, the power sauce, the flagellum or the baring's?

Which bit can it do without while it is waiting for the other bits????

Which came first the caterpillar or the butterfly, not to mention the egg?


Just as with chickens, the egg came first.


Where did the egg come from?

Have any of you come across creating things with modulation, or vibrations?
Shaker

cyberman wrote:
Aquinas teaches that God is without parts and passions, and that this (among other things) makes him very different from a person. Possibly you are gettng confused by the fact that we use language like "him". Easy mistake to make, but the fact that we use "him" doesn't mean we think God is a male human.


No no, nothing to do with the language per se - that's very clearly a hangover from dim and distant times and cultures where patriarchy was the norm and kings, emperors and the like were the holders and purveyors of power.

I was thinking rather more of the fact that whatever Aquinas may have waffled on about, I assume that he felt and acted that his god had passions after all in the sense that the god he believed in wasn't about as inert as a brick wall and actually had a liking for this thing and didn't like that other thing.

Example: twenty-four hours ago you opined that the Israeli soldier who allegedly targeted a Gaza playground (we can't seem to track down the veracity of this story but we'll leave that aside for now and take it at face value) would "burn." Posthumously, I assume. Now that seems to me - unless I'm missing out on something somewhere along the line - that to the theist there's an authority of some kind who judges that such acts are not acceptable and that those who commit them need to be punished.

I hope I'm on-message thus far.

Now: you judge that such actions are unacceptable and should be punished. So do I. (Though in my case by the application of law and therefore not for ever and ever and ever, without any let-up and with no possibility of reprieve). That's a very human thing to do. That is in fact what humans do - decide that this is a good thing and that's a bad thing; approve of x and disapprove of y. We make these judgements constantly, all the time. As soon as we have sufficient mentality switched on to do this sort of thing, it never, ever stops. The wife is being a total bitch right now. That gateau was lovely. That last cup of coffee was foul. That film? Absolutely brilliant, loved it. Judgement, judgement, judgement all the time. We can no more not do it than anybody who can read can look at a word and not comprehend it.

For all that old Tommy whatshischops talked of a god without passions, the theist (specifically*) denies this at practically every turn and takes the god they believe in to be sufficiently personalistic that it does things like expect or even demand worship**, holds that murder is wrong and charity good, considers that the bad things (i.e. the ones it doesn't like) are worthy of punishment in some form, and so on and so forth. Theistic language is shot through with it, everywhere and all the time, so the claim that such a god is without passions rings rather hollow when set against the way that theists habitually talk and act in relation to the gods they purport to believe in. There's a bit of a gulf between what some theists claim about their god and they way they actually act, which denies it.

* Wikipedia: "Theism, in the broadest sense, is the belief that at least one deity exists. In a more specific sense, theism is commonly a monotheistic doctrine concerning the nature of a deity, and that deity's relationship to the universe. Theism, in this specific sense, conceives of God as personal, present and active in the governance and organization of the world and the universe."

** One reason that David Hume advanced this same argument is that it struck him as forcefully as it strikes me that almost all these man-made deities betray the fact by having a very human attribute - "a restless appetite for applause."
Leonard James

It is not sensible to assume that anybody knows more about "God" because they devote their life to studying what has been written about him, and even less what their personal experiences are.

The fact is that we all know exactly nothing about him/it, despite the fervent claims of believers.
JamesJah

Leonard James wrote:
It is not sensible to assume that anybody knows more about "God" because they devote their life to studying what has been written about him, and even less what their personal experiences are.

The fact is that we all know exactly nothing about him/it, despite the fervent claims of believers.


How do you come to that conclusion?

Do you not learn something about a person by what they have accomplished?
cyberman

JamesJah wrote:
cyberman wrote:


Just as with chickens, the egg came first.


Where did the egg come from?

 


The chicken's mother
Leonard James

JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
It is not sensible to assume that anybody knows more about "God" because they devote their life to studying what has been written about him, and even less what their personal experiences are.

The fact is that we all know exactly nothing about him/it, despite the fervent claims of believers.


How do you come to that conclusion?

Do you not learn something about a person by what they have accomplished?


Of course I do! I also know that the human mind is very susceptible to suggestion, and can often be convinced that something is true when in fact it isn't.
JamesJah

Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
It is not sensible to assume that anybody knows more about "God" because they devote their life to studying what has been written about him, and even less what their personal experiences are.

The fact is that we all know exactly nothing about him/it, despite the fervent claims of believers.


How do you come to that conclusion?

Do you not learn something about a person by what they have accomplished?


Of course I do! I also know that the human mind is very susceptible to suggestion, and can often be convinced that something is true when in fact it isn't.


Like evolution and Father Christmas.
Shaker

JamesJah wrote:
Like evolution and Father Christmas.

Nothing like either - evolution is a fact and Father Christmas isn't.
JamesJah

Shaker wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Like evolution and Father Christmas.

Nothing like either - evolution is a fact and Father Christmas isn't.



   

Take a look at the new sound wave technology it might help you see in the dark.
Shaker

Are you on medication of some sort?
trentvoyager

Shaker wrote:
Are you on medication of some sort?


Clearly not  
Leonard James

Shaker wrote:
Are you on medication of some sort?


Being befuddled is natural to a few people, the rest of us suffer it only from a blow on the head or drugs of some sort.
JamesJah

If nothing is put into a can you can get nothing out.

The lazy man sais there is a lion in the square I shall be killed.


Leonard James

JamesJah wrote:
If nothing is put into a can you can get nothing out.

The lazy man sais there is a lion in the square I shall be killed.




And you can't get more befuddled than that!  
JamesJah

Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
If nothing is put into a can you can get nothing out.

The lazy man sais there is a lion in the square I shall be killed.




And you can't get more befuddled than that!  



If you have nothing what do you get befuddled with?

Eat, drink and sleep because tomorrow we die.
Leonard James

Why does a mouse when it spins?

Because the higher it gets the fewer.
JamesJah

How many skulls does it take to make a human?

How many to make a numb skull?

How many to skull a boat?

How many brains do we need for one skull?

What happens when the skulls evolve and the arms and legs do not?

What happens if the skulls evolve but the brain does not?

Why is the woman brain different to the man brain?

Come to that why are the fingers different?

JamesJah

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXDDZrYOuAE
Sebastian Toe

JamesJah wrote:
cyberman wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
The
The rotary engine discovered as the flagellum can not evolve in stages so has to have had a creator, but then the same goes for metamorphoses, does it not?
   


It does not, I think. Creationists used to say this about eyeballs. It just isn't so - these things can indeed develop by many small degrees.


Which small degree came first?

The armature, the stator, the power sauce, the flagellum or the baring's?

Which bit can it do without while it is waiting for the other bits????


That 'argument' has been destroyed for quite some time.

Go educate yourself

As an icon of anti-evolution, the flagellum has fallen.

The very existence of the Type III Secretory System shows that the bacterial flagellum is not irreducibly complex. It also demonstrates, more generally, that the claim of "irreducible complexity" is scientifically meaningless, constructed as it is upon the flimsiest of foundations – the assertion that because science has not yet found selectable functions for the components of a certain structure, it never will. In the final analysis, as the claims of intelligent design fall by the wayside, its advocates are left with a single, remaining tool with which to battle against the rising tide of scientific evidence. That tool may be effective in some circles, of course, but the scientific community will be quick to recognize it for what it really is – the classic argument from ignorance, dressed up in the shiny cloth of biochemistry and information theory.


http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/design2/article.html
JamesJah

Sebastian Toe wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
cyberman wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
The
The rotary engine discovered as the flagellum can not evolve in stages so has to have had a creator, but then the same goes for metamorphoses, does it not?
   


It does not, I think. Creationists used to say this about eyeballs. It just isn't so - these things can indeed develop by many small degrees.


Which small degree came first?

The armature, the stator, the power sauce, the flagellum or the baring's?

Which bit can it do without while it is waiting for the other bits????


That 'argument' has been destroyed for quite some time.

Go educate yourself

As an icon of anti-evolution, the flagellum has fallen.

The very existence of the Type III Secretory System shows that the bacterial flagellum is not irreducibly complex. It also demonstrates, more generally, that the claim of "irreducible complexity" is scientifically meaningless, constructed as it is upon the flimsiest of foundations – the assertion that because science has not yet found selectable functions for the components of a certain structure, it never will. In the final analysis, as the claims of intelligent design fall by the wayside, its advocates are left with a single, remaining tool with which to battle against the rising tide of scientific evidence. That tool may be effective in some circles, of course, but the scientific community will be quick to recognize it for what it really is – the classic argument from ignorance, dressed up in the shiny cloth of biochemistry and information theory.


http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/design2/article.html


Are people still thinking he who shouts the loudest is intelligent?

Since when has things can make themselves been science?

Most evolutionists will accept any old junk teaching because they have not the skill to check for themselves.

Most people who teach evolution have not looked down a microscope.

How many bits does a cell need to function? Minimum that is.
Sebastian Toe

JamesJah wrote:


Are people still thinking he who shouts the loudest is intelligent?

Since when has things can make themselves been science?

Most evolutionists will accept any old junk teaching because they have not the skill to check for themselves.

Most people who teach evolution have not looked down a microscope.

How many bits does a cell need to function? Minimum that is.


1. I don't know, are they still thinking that? What examples do you have?

2. Never.

3. Proof please? None? Dismissed.

4. Proof please? None? Dismissed.

5. Do you know?
JamesJah

JamesJah wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXDDZrYOuAE


T for those too stupid to look all the proof about the rubbish of evolutionists thinking was here.

When answer a thing before he hears it that is [????]
Sebastian Toe

JamesJah wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXDDZrYOuAE


T for those too stupid to look all the proof about the rubbish of evolutionists thinking was here.

When answer a thing before he hears it that is [????]
unadulterated drivel.
Are you really as stupid as your posts suggest?
JamesJah

Sebastian Toe wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXDDZrYOuAE


T for those too stupid to look all the proof about the rubbish of evolutionists thinking was here.

When answer a thing before he hears it that is [????]
unadulterated drivel.
Are you really as stupid as your posts suggest?


All the evidence does show some one is not too bright, does it not???


Proverbs 18:13
When anyone is replying to a matter before he hears [it], that is foolishness on his part and a humiliation


How many parts are there to the simple cell?

How many are requires for a living cell to exist?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWWFf8G3BKI
Sebastian Toe

JamesJah wrote:
Sebastian Toe wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXDDZrYOuAE


T for those too stupid to look all the proof about the rubbish of evolutionists thinking was here.

When answer a thing before he hears it that is [????]
unadulterated drivel.
Are you really as stupid as your posts suggest?


All the evidence does show some one is not too bright, does it not???


Proverbs 18:13
When anyone is replying to a matter before he hears [it], that is foolishness on his part and a humiliation


How many parts are there to the simple cell?

How many are requires for a living cell to exist?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWWFf8G3BKI
Thank you for confirming that my previous query has turned out in the affirmative.
Sebastian Toe

JamesJah wrote:
Sebastian Toe wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXDDZrYOuAE


T for those too stupid to look all the proof about the rubbish of evolutionists thinking was here.

When answer a thing before he hears it that is [????]
unadulterated drivel.
Are you really as stupid as your posts suggest?


All the evidence does show some one is not too bright, does it not???


Proverbs 18:13
When anyone is replying to a matter before he hears [it], that is foolishness on his part and a humiliation


How many parts are there to the simple cell?

How many are requires for a living cell to exist?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWWFf8G3BKI
Thank you for confirming that my previous query has turned out in the affirmative.
JamesJah

People who say evolution is true are deceivers of the mind who are deliberately lying.

What was the first life form?
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
People who say evolution is true are deceivers of the mind who are deliberately lying.

-
People who deliberately falsify measurements in order to skew their interpretation of Scripture are deliberately lying.
People who deliberately falsify the available history to create a false date for the capture of Jerusalem in order to fit their false interpretation of Scripture are deliberately lying.

Given those FACTS, why should anyone accept ANYTHING from the lie factory which comprises their HQ?
-

What was the first life form?
Jim

-

What was the first life form?

-
I don't know.
I wasn't there four billion years ago.[/quote]
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
People who say evolution is true are deceivers of the mind who are deliberately lying.

-
People who deliberately falsify measurements in order to skew their interpretation of Scripture are deliberately lying.
People who deliberately falsify the available history to create a false date for the capture of Jerusalem in order to fit their false interpretation of Scripture are deliberately lying.

Given those FACTS, why should anyone accept ANYTHING from the lie factory which comprises their HQ?
-

What was the first life form?
Sebastian Toe

JamesJah wrote:
People who say evolution is true are deceivers of the mind who are deliberately lying.

What was the first life form?
people who deny evolution are willfully ignorant fools.
cyberman

JamesJah wrote:
People who say evolution is true are deceivers of the mind who are deliberately lying.


If it is true that all people who believe in evolution are deliberately lying, then that means that all of them know that it is not true.

If evolution is not true, and everyone who states that it is true knows that it is not true, then no-one has been deceived.

If no-one has been deceived, then you cannot accuse anyone of being a 'deceiver'.
JamesJah

cyberman wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
People who say evolution is true are deceivers of the mind who are deliberately lying.


If it is true that all people who believe in evolution are deliberately lying, then that means that all of them know that it is not true.

If evolution is not true, and everyone who states that it is true knows that it is not true, then no-one has been deceived.

If no-one has been deceived, then you cannot accuse anyone of being a 'deceiver'.


Evolutionism is an invention of those that have no wish to live a disciplined life that is necessary when the planet is full of people. they wish to conduct themselves as if they are the only ones to be considered.

The creator of the human race has shown what the results of mans foolishness would be if man remained animalistic, he has also left instructions for the solution to the problem, which the evolutionist keeps trying to avoid.

No man is intelligent enough  to solve this worlds problems, and the one that can solve them is being disregarded by those that hate the idea that they are responsible to their creator.

Evolution ceases to be any longer an excuse for self determination,

THE WORLD IS TOO CROWDED.

There is only one source of education that can give man the correct balanced thinking which will enable him to live with his neighbour and there is only one man that showed what that thinking should be when he taught to love ones neighbour as one self






Click to see full size image
Sebastian Toe

JamesJah wrote:
cyberman wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
People who say evolution is true are deceivers of the mind who are deliberately lying.


If it is true that all people who believe in evolution are deliberately lying, then that means that all of them know that it is not true.

If evolution is not true, and everyone who states that it is true knows that it is not true, then no-one has been deceived.

If no-one has been deceived, then you cannot accuse anyone of being a 'deceiver'.


Evolutionism is an invention of those that have no wish to live a disciplined life that is necessary when the planet is full of people. they wish to conduct themselves as if they are the only ones to be considered.

The creator of the human race has shown what the results of mans foolishness would be if man remained animalistic, he has also left instructions for the solution to the problem, which the evolutionist keeps trying to avoid.

No man is intelligent enough  to solve this worlds problems, and the one that can solve them is being disregarded by those that hate the idea that they are responsible to their creator.

Evolution ceases to be any longer an excuse for self determination,

THE WORLD IS TOO CROWDED.

There is only one source of education that can give man the correct balanced thinking which will enable him to live with his neighbour and there is only one man that showed what that thinking should be when he taught to love ones neighbour as one self






Click to see full size image
The witterings of a truely deluded mind! Thanks once again for confirming my earlier point.
Leonard James

JamesJah wrote:


THE WORLD IS TOO CROWDED.



Quite! And daft religious edicts to 'go forth and multiply' are the cause of its overcrowding.

Now try to take notice of the command to love your neighbour (which includes all future generations), and stop breeding like rabbits. Most people in the west have done so, but in other parts of the world which are not informed scientifically, ignorance on the subject still prevails, promoted mostly by religious nuts who teach that the use of condoms for birth control is a sin.
Shaker

JamesJah wrote:
THE WORLD IS TOO CROWDED.


Good heavens! JJ actually says something not only comprehensible but sensible for practically the first time ever!
Jim

Just to point out that most Christians, including evangelicals such as myself, have absolutely no problems in accepting evolution, or an 'old Earth' creation.

This is in contrast to certain groups which play fast and loose with history and available evidence in order to make them fit into a preconceived theory.



Anyone want a black pufdding?
Leonard James

Jim wrote:
Just to point out that most Christians, including evangelicals such as myself, have absolutely no problems in accepting evolution, or an 'old Earth' creation.

This is in contrast to certain groups which play fast and loose with history and available evidence in order to make them fit into a preconceived theory.


Hi Jim,

Yes, fortunately some Christians are not so stupid as to believe the literal meaning of the Bible stories. It is the others that are doing the damage to your religion.

Quote:
Anyone want a black pufdding?


If it's the same as black pudding, yes indeed ... I love it.

But if the 'puf' part means different ingredients, I want to know what's in it, first!  
Jim

Leonard James wrote:
Jim wrote:
Just to point out that most Christians, including evangelicals such as myself, have absolutely no problems in accepting evolution, or an 'old Earth' creation.

This is in contrast to certain groups which play fast and loose with history and available evidence in order to make them fit into a preconceived theory.


Hi Jim,

Yes, fortunately some Christians are not so stupid as to believe the literal meaning of the Bible stories. It is the others that are doing the damage to your religion.

Quote:
Anyone want a black pufdding?


If it's the same as black pudding, yes indeed ... I love it.

But if the 'puf' part means different ingredients, I want to know what's in it, first!  


-
Woops - typo!
Actually, Len, I offered a Stornoway Black pudding to two  members of a certain cult who refused to say whether I'd have been better off refusing the blood transfusion which saved my life.
For some reason they weren't happy with my (very genuine) offer...what a shame, since I happen to think that Stornoway Black Puddings are about the best one can get....
JamesJah

The easy option in this world in more often than not the option one should not take.

Many who come here who think the glib answer is the clever one, will be of little use in a real crisis's.

That is why real Christians have been advised to take the narrow road to life and not the broad and spacious one every one is on.

Matthew 7:13, 14
Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; 14 whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
The easy option in this world in more often than not the option one should not take.

Many who come here who think the glib answer is the clever one, will be of little use in a real crisis's.

That is why real Christians have been advised to take the narrow road to life and not the broad and spacious one every one is on.

Matthew 7:13, 14
Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; 14 whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.


-
Nice text.
Pity it has diddly squat to do with
A) Evolution,
or
B) a certain quasi-Christian sects' misinterpretation of thier mistranslation of scriptures.
Leonard James

Jim wrote:

For some reason they weren't happy with my (very genuine) offer...what a shame, since I happen to think that Stornoway Black Puddings are about the best one can get....


I have a maxim in life which has served me well. Never be afraid to try something new, because you could well be missing out on part of life's pleasures.

What you've never had you never miss, and ain't that the truth!
JamesJah

Leonard James wrote:
Jim wrote:

For some reason they weren't happy with my (very genuine) offer...what a shame, since I happen to think that Stornoway Black Puddings are about the best one can get....


I have a maxim in life which has served me well. Never be afraid to try something new, because you could well be missing out on part of life's pleasures.

What you've never had you never miss, and ain't that the truth!


The gods of this world are still ten a penny.

But the Almighty God ruler of the universe is a God knowing the end from the beginning and he reviles that in the writings he had his servants transcribe for him.

Daniel's righting's' show this to be true, so do the facts that we can view today at what he calls the time of the end of this system of things and the time for the removal of those that abuse others that live on this planet.

Now you can not say you have not spotted this one can you?>>\/

Revelation 16:8, 9
The fourth one poured out his bowl on the sun, and to the sun it was granted to scorch the people with fire. And the people were scorched by the great heat, but they blasphemed the name of God, who has the authority over these plagues, and they did not repent and give glory to him.

How many of these plagues are there before the end comes?

Revelation 15:1
I saw in heaven another sign, great and wonderful, seven angels with seven plagues.

These are the last ones, because by means of them the anger of God is brought to a finish.







Click to see full size image
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Jim wrote:

For some reason they weren't happy with my (very genuine) offer...what a shame, since I happen to think that Stornoway Black Puddings are about the best one can get....


I have a maxim in life which has served me well. Never be afraid to try something new, because you could well be missing out on part of life's pleasures.

What you've never had you never miss, and ain't that the truth!


The gods of this world are still ten a penny.
-
Especially the one who comes from Brooklyn (not, apparently, Beth Sarim....)
-

But the Almighty God ruler of the universe is a God knowing the end from the beginning and he reviles that in the writings he had his servants transcribe for him.
-
Ok, apart from the jargon, I can live with this.
-

Daniel's righting's' show this to be true, so do the facts that we can view today at what he calls the time of the end of this system of things and the time for the removal of those that abuse others that live on this planet.

-
Whoops!
Daniel's writings might reveal much....but certain interpretations - especially mentioning something which DEFINATELY did not happen in 607 BC, show that these interpretations are bout as reliable as WT prophesies.
-
Now you can not say you have not spotted this one can you?>>\/

-
Especially as Daniel is not Revelation...so spotting it might be a tad difficult....

Revelation 16:8, 9
The fourth one poured out his bowl on the sun, and to the sun it was granted to scorch the people with fire. And the people were scorched by the great heat, but they blasphemed the name of God, who has the authority over these plagues, and they did not repent and give glory to him.

How many of these plagues are there before the end comes?

Revelation 15:1
I saw in heaven another sign, great and wonderful, seven angels with seven plagues.

These are the last ones, because by means of them the anger of God is brought to a finish.



 Anyone got a spare mansion or pyramid handy?



Click to see full size image
JamesJah

Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Jim wrote:

For some reason they weren't happy with my (very genuine) offer...what a shame, since I happen to think that Stornoway Black Puddings are about the best one can get....


I have a maxim in life which has served me well. Never be afraid to try something new, because you could well be missing out on part of life's pleasures.

What you've never had you never miss, and ain't that the truth!


The gods of this world are still ten a penny.
-
Especially the one who comes from Brooklyn (not, apparently, Beth Sarim....)
-

But the Almighty God ruler of the universe is a God knowing the end from the beginning and he reviles that in the writings he had his servants transcribe for him.
-
Ok, apart from the jargon, I can live with this.
-

Daniel's righting's' show this to be true, so do the facts that we can view today at what he calls the time of the end of this system of things and the time for the removal of those that abuse others that live on this planet.

-
Whoops!
Daniel's writings might reveal much....but certain interpretations - especially mentioning something which DEFINATELY did not happen in 607 BC, show that these interpretations are bout as reliable as WT prophesies.
-
Now you can not say you have not spotted this one can you?>>\/

-
Especially as Daniel is not Revelation...so spotting it might be a tad difficult....

Revelation 16:8, 9
The fourth one poured out his bowl on the sun, and to the sun it was granted to scorch the people with fire. And the people were scorched by the great heat, but they blasphemed the name of God, who has the authority over these plagues, and they did not repent and give glory to him.

How many of these plagues are there before the end comes?

Revelation 15:1
I saw in heaven another sign, great and wonderful, seven angels with seven plagues.

These are the last ones, because by means of them the anger of God is brought to a finish.



 Anyone got a spare mansion or pyramid handy?



Click to see full size image



As Elijah is living in England I should think he does not need his one.

Matthew 17:10, 11
However, the disciples put the question to him: “Why, then, do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” 11 In reply he said: “Elijah is indeed coming and will restore all things.
cyberman

JamesJah wrote:
Elijah is living in England  


I'm sorry..? What?
Jim

cyberman wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Elijah is living in England  


I'm sorry..? What?


-
Yep...I thought my screenreader had been drinking again.
JamesJah

cyberman wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Elijah is living in England  


I'm sorry..? What?


No one introduced you I wonder why?

Malachi 3:17, 18
.in the day when I produce a special property. I will show them compassion, just as a man shows compassion to his son who serves him.

Y You will again see the distinction between a righteous person and a wicked person, between one serving God and one not serving him.”
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
cyberman wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Elijah is living in England  


I'm sorry..? What?


No one introduced you I wonder why?

Malachi 3:17, 18
.in the day when I produce a special property. I will show them compassion, just as a man shows compassion to his son who serves him.

Y You will again see the distinction between a righteous person and a wicked person, between one serving God and one not serving him.”


And this equates with Elijah's living in England how, exactly*
Any fiery chariots on the M1?


* - don't tell me they've bought another "Beth Sarim" in England?
JamesJah

How to build a fiery chariot.





Click to see full size image
JamesJah

There were giants in the land.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?fea...etailpage&v=Fc7X27NQm7Q#t=360
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
There were giants in the land.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?fea...etailpage&v=Fc7X27NQm7Q#t=360


Er....you ARE aware of the chronology of Amerindian archaeology and the origins of native American culture, I take it?
You haven't been reading the Book of Mormon, have you?
Seen any steel clad elephants there as well?
JamesJah

Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
There were giants in the land.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?fea...etailpage&v=Fc7X27NQm7Q#t=360


Er....you ARE aware of the chronology of Amerindian archaeology and the origins of native American culture, I take it?
You haven't been reading the Book of Mormon, have you?
Seen any steel clad elephants there as well?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsI_4hjrEro
Jim

Oh, I prefer
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/1800s.php
James.
More accurate.
JamesJah

Jim wrote:
Oh, I prefer
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/1800s.php
James.
More accurate.


Here is one you have missed in your travels.

Daniel 12:9, 10
Then he said: “Go, Daniel, because the words are to be kept secret and sealed up until the time of the end.

Many will cleanse themselves and whiten themselves and will be refined. And the wicked ones will act wickedly, and

none of the wicked will understand; but those having insight will understand.
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
Jim wrote:
Oh, I prefer
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/1800s.php
James.
More accurate.


Here is one you have missed in your travels.

Daniel 12:9, 10
Then he said: “Go, Daniel, because the words are to be kept secret and sealed up until the time of the end.

Many will cleanse themselves and whiten themselves and will be refined. And the wicked ones will act wickedly, and

none of the wicked will understand; but those having insight will understand.

-
see previous link.
JamesJah

Jim wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Jim wrote:
Oh, I prefer
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/1800s.php
James.
More accurate.


Here is one you have missed in your travels.

Daniel 12:9, 10
Then he said: “Go, Daniel, because the words are to be kept secret and sealed up until the time of the end.

Many will cleanse themselves and whiten themselves and will be refined. And the wicked ones will act wickedly, and

none of the wicked will understand; but those having insight will understand.

-
see previous link.


That is so far out of date to be unreal.

None of those people are not even alive today.

When Jesus came to choose the faithful slave he had to make do with what was available and knock them into shape most religions happened to be as he said they would be full of the worlds traditions and unfaithful to his word,

Like yourself fixed on a point of view and unwilling to change.

There was at the time of his inspection only a small group willing to change their lives to bring them in harmony with his word, so he whitened them.

You did not happen to be around at the time, but you have met Christ's brothers on a number of occasions, did you appreciate what they where doing?

Matthew 25:40
‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.

Daniel 12:9, 1
.Then he said: “Go, Daniel, because the words are to be kept secret and sealed up until the time of the end.

 Many will cleanse themselves and whiten themselves and will be refined.

The wicked ones will act wickedly, and none of the wicked will understand; but those having insight will understand.



John 17:3
.This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ.
Leonard James

Wibble, wibble, wibble...ad infinitum.
JamesJah

Leonard James wrote:
Wibble, wibble, wibble...ad infinitum.


Is this your idea of life>?

What hope do you have, is it to struggle through a few short years then die?
Leonard James

JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Wibble, wibble, wibble...ad infinitum.


Is this your idea of life>?

What hope do you have, is it to struggle through a few short years then die?


We don't have any choice, my friend, so enjoy it as much as you can while you're here.  
JamesJah

Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Wibble, wibble, wibble...ad infinitum.


Is this your idea of life>?

What hope do you have, is it to struggle through a few short years then die?


We don't have any choice, my friend, so enjoy it as much as you can while you're here.  


What exactly is there to enjoy?

The world has been turned into a gigantic dustbin and you are amused, have you never wondered if there might be more to life if people had a better way of dealing with it?
Leonard James

JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Wibble, wibble, wibble...ad infinitum.


Is this your idea of life>?

What hope do you have, is it to struggle through a few short years then die?


We don't have any choice, my friend, so enjoy it as much as you can while you're here.  


What exactly is there to enjoy?

The world has been turned into a gigantic dustbin and you are amused, have you never wondered if there might be more to life if people had a better way of dealing with it?


Oh woe, woe, woe is me! We are doomed, I tell ya, DOOOOOOMED!

         
JamesJah

Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Wibble, wibble, wibble...ad infinitum.


Is this your idea of life>?

What hope do you have, is it to struggle through a few short years then die?


We don't have any choice, my friend, so enjoy it as much as you can while you're here.  


What exactly is there to enjoy?

The world has been turned into a gigantic dustbin and you are amused, have you never wondered if there might be more to life if people had a better way of dealing with it?


Oh woe, woe, woe is me! We are doomed, I tell ya, DOOOOOOMED!

         


Living on a rubbish tip is not what I would call living.

Do you know where Gehenna is?

In Amman in Jordan when I lived there it was not possible to distinguish where the rubbish tip ended and the living quarters began.

How many places are there  on this planet that do not resemble a rubbish tip?

How many humans know what life could be like if they had been educated properly instead of trying to educate themselves when they know nothing.

Personally I do not find much that is funny in any place on this planet.
Jim

JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Wibble, wibble, wibble...ad infinitum.


Is this your idea of life>?

What hope do you have, is it to struggle through a few short years then die?


We don't have any choice, my friend, so enjoy it as much as you can while you're here.  


What exactly is there to enjoy?

The world has been turned into a gigantic dustbin and you are amused, have you never wondered if there might be more to life if people had a better way of dealing with it?


Oh woe, woe, woe is me! We are doomed, I tell ya, DOOOOOOMED!

         


Living on a rubbish tip is not what I would call living.

Do you know where Gehenna is?


Yes.
Outside Jerusalem.
-
JamesJah wrote:
In Amman in Jordan when I lived there it was not possible to distinguish where the rubbish tip ended and the living quarters began.

-
Yes.
And?
(I've helped excavate such a pit at Tanis in Egypt...they're not uncommon, ypou know.
-

JamesJah wrote:
How many places are there  on this planet that do not resemble a rubbish tip?

-
Millioms.
-

JamesJah wrote:
How many humans know what life could be like if they had been educated properly instead of trying to educate themselves when they know nothing.


http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/j...education-to-non-jws#.VAYvRRh0wT4


-
I thought Russelites discouraged their acolytes from tertiary and post graduate education?
-
JamesJah wrote:
Personally I do not find much that is funny in any place on this planet.

-
Sad, dat.



Moderator:  Jim, I fixed the quotes for you.
Sebastian Toe

JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Wibble, wibble, wibble...ad infinitum.


Is this your idea of life>?

What hope do you have, is it to struggle through a few short years then die?


We don't have any choice, my friend, so enjoy it as much as you can while you're here.  


What exactly is there to enjoy?

The world has been turned into a gigantic dustbin and you are amused, have you never wondered if there might be more to life if people had a better way of dealing with it?


Oh woe, woe, woe is me! We are doomed, I tell ya, DOOOOOOMED!

         


Living on a rubbish tip is not what I would call living.

Do you know where Gehenna is?

In Amman in Jordan when I lived there it was not possible to distinguish where the rubbish tip ended and the living quarters began.

How many places are there  on this planet that do not resemble a rubbish tip?

How many humans know what life could be like if they had been educated properly instead of trying to educate themselves when they know nothing.

Personally I do not find much that is funny in any place on this planet.
One place that is very funny is right here as witnessed by your hilarious attempts at any logic and reason!  
JamesJah

Sebastian Toe wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
JamesJah wrote:
Leonard James wrote:
Wibble, wibble, wibble...ad infinitum.


Is this your idea of life>?

What hope do you have, is it to struggle through a few short years then die?


We don't have any choice, my friend, so enjoy it as much as you can while you're here.  


What exactly is there to enjoy?

The world has been turned into a gigantic dustbin and you are amused, have you never wondered if there might be more to life if people had a better way of dealing with it?


Oh woe, woe, woe is me! We are doomed, I tell ya, DOOOOOOMED!

         


Living on a rubbish tip is not what I would call living.

Do you know where Gehenna is?

In Amman in Jordan when I lived there it was not possible to distinguish where the rubbish tip ended and the living quarters began.

How many places are there  on this planet that do not resemble a rubbish tip?

How many humans know what life could be like if they had been educated properly instead of trying to educate themselves when they know nothing.

Personally I do not find much that is funny in any place on this planet.
One place that is very funny is right here as witnessed by your hilarious attempts at any logic and reason!  


Obviously it is a problem that is catching.

I see America is enjoying global warming.

End time prophecies not caught up with you persons yet then?







Leonard James

JamesJah wrote:

Living on a rubbish tip is not what I would call living.



Nor would I, and we must do all we can to better the conditions of those who have to, not wring our hands and pray to "God" to do it.
trentvoyager

Quote:
End time prophecies not caught up with you persons yet then?



The rather marvellous thing is though - that even if as a race we mess everything up spectacularly, the planet will go on. We may be long gone but the planet will recover in time; and maybe newer, more 'in tune with the planet' forms of life will come along.

So not really the end times - perhaps the end times for the human race (although I doubt that) - but the planet will survive and prosper.

I find that reassuring for some reason.

       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> All faiths and none Page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum