Total posts: 5,875
Posted in:
He can't answer you, but to his credit, he will be the most honest about his position. The atheist's position here is wholly illogical, and easily demonstrated to be. So they deflect and dodge.You said nothing is wrong but you are going to stop Joe from doing it because you don't like it. Why would you stop him from doing it if it was not wrong? Surely it is live and let live??? This shows the inconsistency of the nihilist position.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
But each new generation, ignorant of history and human nature, will try again.
Right now, they are fighting to bring it to America. We won't allow them.
Created:
Posted in:
Except when its no evidence abiogenesis.Fine, it's been considered, but since there's no evidence, the idea is pointless to consider further.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MagicAintReal
Just to be clear, I posted up to 9 different sources that verify up to 30 pieces of evidence and you've failed to respond to any of it, right?
I don't have to respond to any of it. But I did. It isn't evidence for abiogenesis and does not become so by you slapping that label on it. You aren't a court, and I have no obligation to respond to you. And if I do, I respond how I like.
Noted.
No need to inform me on what you note. No matter how much you try to pester me, I won't change. You have no scientific evidence that shows life can start from inorganic materials. I don't care if your poor science education makes you mistake fluff for scientific evidence. But I do not have to agree with you.
Don't you have a debate to attend?
Created:
Posted in:
No spin. We want murderers to pay the just price. We don't cuddle them like liberals do. Liberals only want death for the helpless and innocent. Criminals and murderers get sanctuary from liberals.Pro death penalty is PRO-DEATH no matter what silly conservative spin you try to put on it.
Anti abortion is to be against single mothers and against PERSONAL-SOVEREIGNTY.
They can't be against mothers if you idiots claim the human inside them is not a person Mr. Vorhees. Anti-abortion is against death, and against women who murder little babies.
Liberals are also against illegal immigration.
That is a lie. You place water in the desert so that criminals can better break the law. You give them sanctuary after they break the law. You want to do away with borders and law enforcement. Shine a light on the liberal position and they begin to lie.
Conservatives are currently for increasing barriers to LEGAL immigration.
Right, because uncontrolled immigration is the path of poverty and death, which liberals love.
Liberals are currently for decreasing barriers to LEGAL immigration.
We know. You want the country swarmed with 3rd world illiterates and Islamic intolerant jihadists. Yours is a Death Cult.
Conservatives are anti-homosexual, they are not anti disease.
Yet it was conservatives who made all the progress in HIV medications. You can yell "nah-uh" all you want, simple opposition does not an argument make.
If homosexuals had followed the conservative method of conducting their lives, the millions who died would have lived. Instead they were fooled by the liberal blathering about personal sovereignty and died like roaches. You don't care for homosexuals, you care for death.
Conservatives have not made preventative medicine or health care in general a priority at all.
Because the government is not your daddy. Conservatives do not want government in every facet of our lives. Liberals do, so that they can enforce their death cult.
Conservatives are pro-suffering, that is why they don't lobby the govt to make voluntary death a law.
Exactly. Conservatives know that suffering is part of life, and that death is not the answer to suffering. For you death cult liberals, death is a wonderful thing.
Stopping terminally ill patients from being able to choose when to die peacefully is not a pro-life position. These people will die either way.
Everyone will die either way Vlad. We just choose life. You choose death. Because death is your only answer. Its all you know. Kill the babies! Kill the old! Kill the I'll! Kill, kill, kill! Same as your jihadist pets. Yours is a death cult.
Recreational drugs, including alcohol and cigarettes and cigars and caffeine and sugar are for the stupid.
True, except for sugar. Sugar is not a drug, and without it you would die. Exactly why your death cult wants it banned, but will push weed as healthy.
No pharmaceutical company sells recreational drugs, but they sell drugs with nearly identical physiological effects.
And liberals are their biggest clients. Regardless of what pharmaceutical companies do, hour's is a death cult. You straw man company will not fool us. You worship death.
Liberals do not encourage, but allow the use of recreational drugs,
No need to encourage when virtually every liberal is a drug addled moron contemplating his next tattoo.
A non-sober mind cannot have personal sovereignty chester. You can bold the words all you want, but a liberal high on meth or oxy is light years from personal sovereignty. Personal sovereignty is the natural state of the conservative, not just something he gives lip service to in between highs.
I see you enjoying all that land the military won for you. We need a military for when your death cult comes a-knocking. Twice now they have rang the world's doorbell.
And when you come again, we will send you back to the hades you oozed up from, just like we did the last 2 times.
Created:
Posted in:
Abiogenesis is about science...
No it isn't. Not unless you have a private definition of science.
Created:
Posted in:
Anti abortion is to be against death no matter what silly liberal spin you try to put on it.
Conservatives are against illegal immigration. Liberals are for criminals. Nothing you say will change a lie into truth.
Conservatives are not anti-homosexual, they are anti disease. Feces always encourage sickness.
Conservatives are anti-death, that is why they don't lobby the govt to make death a law.
Recreational drugs are for the stupid. Drugs are not for recreation. That is a pathway to overdose and death. No pharmaceutical company sells recreational drugs. Liberals encourage the use of recreational drugs and so encourage death.
Your liberal spin won't work. Death is the core of all your positions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Now, now, I wouldn't call bully an elephant. And I avoid him because he's an idiot troll. A good reason to avoid anyone I think.
Is he in the room?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Not a human being, just life. Simple life.Until scientists can instantly grow a human being from a test tube, Ethan will say there is no evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
McCollom et al (1999) showed that lipids could form under conditions similar to hydrothermal vents.
How is this evidence for abiogenesis? Did any of those lipids become bio? If cinder blocks can form naturally, is that evidence that houses occur spontaneously?
Lincoln and Joyce (2009) demonstrated a simple pair of cooperative RNA ligases the can replicated each other with rather high yield.
So what? That is what RNA is supposed to do. How is this evidence for abiogenesis? Plus, tell the Gentle Reader where the RNA came from. Go ahead. Don't be shy.
Attwater et al (2013) have produced what is to date the longest RNA-catalyzed RNA polymerization (up to 200 nucleotides). This is key, because the enzyme itself is about the same length, which means in principle we are one step closer to a polymerase that can copy itself in full. An interesting property of their study is that it occurs in a cold environment.
This is not evidence for abiogenesis. The same reproduction techniques are used for many other things like carbon fibers and crystals.
Biological materials have always existed. We have known for ages that they occur in nature. But so what? Abiogenesis says LIFE can come from inorganic material. We already know that our bodies are ultimately made from inorganic materials. Abiogenesis says we can get from that inorganic material to LIFE spontaneously.
That is untrue and against all science to date. At best, your "evidence" is for the natural formation of organic materials. A far cry from evidence for abiogenesis.
Created:
Posted in:
It's funny that you think our atmosphere is pure and clean. Any idea how much pollution is in the air?
I said nothing about the atmosphere. We do not live in the same place.
George Burns smoked 6 massive cigars every day and lived almost 100 years.
Lol. The man of science argues for the healthiness of placing smoke from burning plant material into the lungs. Though cigar smoke is not inhaled, deliberately breathing smoke is still a dazzlingly stupid thing to do. If you think breathing smoke is healthy, you should be glad you live in a country where stupidity is not illegal.
Created:
Posted in:
Let me show you your stupidity OK?
Abortion?Sides with - Tyrannical government control over personal sovereigntyAgainst - Demonizes single mothers, eagerly slashes welfare and child care programs
Conservatives do not like government. They are the ones arguing against govt overreach. And personal sovereignty does not extend to another person, which is what a baby is.
Death Penalty?Sides with - The insanely expensive criminal defense lobbyAgainst - Survivors who prefer criminals serve life-without-parole and people who want to cut government spending
Liberals still side with the killer and hate everyone else. Lobbies and survivors are strawmen.
Immigration?Sides with - The paranoid racistAgainst - Cheap labor essential to capitalism that brings down prices for everyone
Paranoid racists did not draw your country's borders. Paranoid racists did not make your country's immigration laws. Cheap labor is the liberal word for exploited immigrant. The need for cheap labor does not excuse people breaking into the country against the law.
Homosexuality?Sides with - The paranoid, religious homophobeAgainst - Personal sovereignty
There is no such thing as a homophone. And when homosexuals started dying like flies when aids first started, it was the govt. they turned to, not personal sovereignty. And we had to pay.
Euthanasia?Sides with - Tyrannical government control over personal sovereigntyAgainst - Personal sovereignty and the right to decide how much suffering is reasonable
Conservatives are the ones against tyrannical government. Liberals lobbied for a law approving Euthanasia. Siding with death.
Illegal Drugs?Sides with - Greedy pharmaceutical corporations, overdoses and death and prohibition style criminal cartelsAgainst - Personal sovereignty and the right to decide how much suffering is reasonable
Greedy pharmaceutical did not make you become an addict. If you claim to have personal sovereignty, then take responsibility for your actions. Liberals side with death. They have cute code names for each, but its always death.
You seem to stupidly think you can just substitute conservative for liberal and the argument remains the same. While this is actually you validating the logic in my argument, it kills the logic n yours.
Created:
Posted in:
PGA2.0, my hat off to you.
You have taken on 3 atheists and held them to dodges and semantics. Not one of your questions have been answered. (Keith tries but then inadvertantly supports your point. SecMer never answers questions). You though, have address every question they posed, in detail.
All they do is make claims, but can never show why. They reject your claims, but reject them based on preference and not logic. (Especially SecMer)
I've enjoyed the thread, and would vote you the clear winner if this was this a formal debate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
No.If I look up at the moon, the stairs and the planets in the night sky is my observation objective?
What you observe is subject to how fast you're moving, what's happening to the space between you and the stars, what is between you and the stars, and both your movements in relation to each other. Someone else, in another time or location, will observe something else.
The universe is relative.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MagicAintReal
There was no evidence at all, much less "mountains" of it. Miller-Urey was not evidence for abiogenesis.So no response to the mountains of evidence that indicate everything about abiogenesis in the debate link I sent you?
Plus, you cannot force me to debate a silly issue. If you have any evidence for abiogenesis, post it. Otherwise, go do your debate.
Created:
Posted in:
Abortion?
Sides with - the killer of defenseless babies
Against - Defenseless innocent babies
A liberal believes an unwanted pregnancy eading to an unwanted child is not a good thing.
So they kill the child. To the liberal, a dead child is better than an unwanted one.
Liberals do not demand abortions - they do dmand that women are not forced to bring unwanted pregnancy term.
That must be why "women's health" centers push abortions like a pedo offering candy to a kid. If a woman doesn't want a child, why do what it takes to get a child? Liberals certainly do demand abortions.
Death Penalty?
Sides with - The murdering criminal
Against - The innocent victim
The innocent victim of a murder is already dead.
Right. Justice doesn't matter to liberals.
One death should be enough - Two deaths are not better than one.
Unless if they are twins in the mother's womb. In that case, two deaths are better than one for the liberal.
Immigration?
Sides with - The law breaking criminal
Against - The law abiding citizen
Unless all immigrants are law breakers and all non-immigrants are law abding I don't think that make sense.
Thank you. It makes no sense to side with a person breaking the country's laws and not with a law abiding citizen.
Homosexuality?
Sides with - Disease and death
Against - Abstinence and life
Love is so more than the desire to reproduce.
I did not speak of love or reproduction. Neither is homosexuality equal to love.
Euthanasia?
Sides with - Death
Against - Life
Again the liberal seeks only for a choice to exist.
Yes. The choice of death.
Is it right that someone may have to suffer years of painful existence?
The liberals only solution is death.
Unwanted baby? Kill it!
Suffering existence? Kill it!
Illegal Drugs?
Sides with - Overdoses and death
Against - Sobriety and life.
Liberals don't pretend that drug addiction is easily solved
No, they pass out free needles.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
When we remove your fakery, here is what the verse actually says,
Gen 22:2 - And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.
Bibles are free Pinocchio, lying about what verses say is idiotic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nd24007
So you go and place smoke from burning plant material into your lungs. No matter what you say, that is stunningly stupid. Your lungs are not meant to take smoke.
You think doing something as stupid as that is good because it's "new". Go right ahead. I will stick with my "ancient" ways of only taking clean pure air into my lungs.
There is no reality I need to run away from by altering my mental condition. I am not so sad, or depressed, such that I need mood altering drugs. Nor am I a lemming to blindly follow the crowd.
You go smoke. I'll pass.
Created:
Posted in:
Environmental Protection?
Sides with - Owls and Fishes
Against - Humans
Created:
-->
@Mopac
ROFL!!Aliens. Only explanation.
Created:
Because people live "in the Earth" right?No he simply said he would be in the earth for three days. Not a single mention of death .
Because the phrase "in the Earth" was not euphemism for being dead and buried.
Your dimmness is profound.
Created:
Posted in:
I dont think you know Plato's intent with this scenario.
Created:
Why then,did Jesus die so quickly on the cross?
Because He had been tortured for hours before. If you had read the accounts, you wouldn't be ignorant.
Why did they spear his side if he was dead?
To see if He was really dead. See, they didn't know. Too dim to figure that out?
Did Jesus even predict that he would be dead for three days?
Yes. In the OT and NT.
D'oh!!
Created:
Posted in:
Of course. God sacrificed His only Son for me. And His son was Holy.Would you sacrifice your only child if god asked you to?
Castin, an atheist, has already answered you and shown the facts in your reasoning.
is the promise made to Abraham that couldn't possibly be fulfilled
Faulty thinking. God still could have fulfilled the promise, and Abraham would have believed that.
if he had killed his NOT only son and that Abraham was too dim work this out for himself.
God did not ask Abraham to kill his son, God asked him to offer his son. Again you have assumed what is not in the script.
Abraham's other sons were not part of the promise as the promise specified Sarah.
So we see that the one too dim to figure it out is you. Do you ever tire of looking like an idiot?
Created:
Posted in:
That was sweet. But the WH should have bouncers to make reporters follow the rules. Big Canadian dudes who will MAKE entitled reporters give up the mic and shut up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
You and millions of others. That is part of the reason 2,000 years later, we are still talking about it and atheist's still fume. It resonates with people who still have a conscience, a soul.The idea that how you treat the least matters the most is one I find pretty resonant.
Created:
Posted in:
We know jedthro. We're the ones saying Jesus had no denomination.Jesus had no denomination because....
Thus Christianity had no denomination. "Jew" is not a denomination.
Created:
Posted in:
Weed does not kill people
Putting smoke in your lungs is not an intelligent thing to do. And it doesn't matter what else kills or does not kill you.
U will just think ur way. And i will think mine way.
Yes. I will think logically, and you won't. You have the right to smoke anything you want, but the idea that putting smoke into your lungs is OK because other things are more stupid, is stupid.
You are actually standing here advocating for filling your lungs with smoke from burning plant material, and not only think you're being intelligent, but are upset at the person saying that isn't a smart thing to do.
That is the liberal mindset. They can stand here and advocate the brutal slaughter of defenseless infants, and insist they are on the side of life.
It probably is best you don't argue with me.
Created:
Posted in:
This is just a troll thread made by a troll, says the troll.
Show one major political/social liberal position that doesn't side with death.
System of Government?
Sides with - Socialism/communism and death
Against - Democracy and life
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
There was no need to validate what Jane said about you. I already knew.
Created:
Posted in:
Let each successive member be passed by the vote of current members. The vote of current members who do not vote on an applying candidate in a certain amount of time become "yes" so that absent members do not hold up an application.
Elite members should have a culling vote every 3 to 6 months to get rid of those who have
1. Not debated
2. Knowingly Invited in rubbish
3. Refused to vote on applications
4. Refused valid applications for inadequate reasons
5. Etc
The group should be really elite. High standards. Judgments by a majority of members is final. Kicked out elites must wait 3 months to re-apply for membership.
Separate HOF for elite debates and members.
Created:
Posted in:
To discourage people from simply voting thumbs up on topics with which they agree, (and verse versa) have a scaled voting system.
Each elite will state his political, social, religious, etc, position, and positive votes against his position will carry more points than votes for his position.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
I totally agree. The people who don't debate sometimes underestimate the value of debate to the site. I think it is the search for good debates that first draws people here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
You clearly have not read the latest research that I provided to you.
I did. You may not know it, but Miller-Urey is ancient.
You are the one who suggested that people flock to abiogenesis because of their terror of some unspecified, imaginary, magical "god".
Actually, you people suggest it yourselves. Why, other than fear, would you keep bringing up God when I haven't?
Your inability to suggest a more viable hypothesis leaves abiogenesis the only option to explore scientifically.
That is blindingly stupid. Is Santa viable unless some other method is suggested? Are you really saying we should adopt a theory with no evidence at all because we don't have one? That is moronic.
Science points to life from life. That is what we see everyday. That is what all scientific experiments and observation indicates. There is no need to adopt bogus theories with no evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
No. This is philosophy.
What is it about liberalism that makes it attracted to death?
Environmentalism?
Sides with - 0 Population growth
Against - Babies and Life
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
This is an excellent idea with a lot of potential. I never debate but would consider it if the quality of the debates were better. Many others would too.
Created:
Posted in:
"It"?It is currently being tested, in laboratories.
That is a lie and you know it. No one is testing abiogenesis because there are no instances of abiogenesis anywhere.
Miller Urey and subsequent experiments not only failed to support abiogenesis, but supported life from life.
Created:
Posted in:
What do you mean by "science doesn't recommend it"?
There is no scientific evidence for it whatsoever.
And how is "god" a more scientific hypothesis?
I don't know. Perhaps you should ask the person suggesting God.
Do you imagine that reasonable people are terrified of other things that have no scientific evidence?
You aren't reasonable if your adoption of abiogenesis is not due to science. Not all other things lead to God in your estimation.
Do you imagine that reasonable people are terrified of the loch ness monster, space aliens, big foot, trolls, and ghosts?
If they imagined it would lead to something they feared, yes.
There is a reason you have been the only one here to mention God.
Do you imagine that human terror itself is considered serious scientific evidence?
I haven't a clue what "serious scientific evidence" is to you, or why you would think someone is offering it as "evidence" (evidence for what?) But I know you aren't evoking God because of science. You cling to a bankrupt, evidence-less theory because you are terrified it means the alternative is God.
Why you think so a anyone's guess, but people fear what they fear.
Created:
Posted in:
Islamic Terrorism?
Sides with - Muslim and death
Against - Christian and life
As I said, any position.
Created:
Posted in:
It's a great idea. (goes well with the Art in debate art) but you would have to make sure that spotty vote moderation didn't kill it.
Created:
Posted in:
Can you conceive of any possible way (even in your wildest imagination) to scientifically test "intelligent design"?
Can you conceive of any possible way (even in your wildest imagination) to scientifically test "abiogenesis"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
No it isn't. Why would it be? Science doesn't recommend it. There is no evidence for it. Why is it reasonable? Why is it even an avenue?Abiogenesis is a reasonable hypothetical avenue to pursue
Because you think the alternative lets God in, and you are terrified of God. That isn't science, that's irrational fear.
Created:
Posted in:
Life comes from life - reductio ad infinitum.
Only if we pre-assume your view of reality is correct.
We know for a fact that life as we know it could not have existed prior to the development of the first stars.
A fact? When we did the famous slit experiment we knew for a fact that photons were discreet particles. Yet they went through both slits. Did we throw out the idea that photons were particles? No. There was an explanation.
The fact is that science points to life from life. There is an explanation. We do not abandon hundreds of years of science because we currently don't have an answer.
No matter what else we discover, the facts are that science shows that life comes from life. We don't get all the truth at once. We discover it a step at a time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Then explain it to us. Show us the mechanism. How did that single beagle give rise to all beagles? How did its offspring keep its parent's beagle qualities if it could only mate with non-beagles? Do you know?But there was a point where a non-beagle gave birth to a beagle.
And no generalities please, details.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
You've shown your hand already man, it's a little late to pretend to be unbiased and objective.
Your question is bogus. Do you have a "alternative" to Santa Clause? Do you have a "alternative" to blood letting?
Why would anyone need an "alternative" to abiogenesis?
Science doesn't recommend it. It has no evidence. Why is it even among the options?
What is your preferred hypothetical....
This is science, not a supermarket. It isn't by choice. It's not what you prefer. It is where science leads. We follow.
Life comes from life. That is science. That is fact.
Created:
Posted in:
Pick any position, and the liberal will side with the oppressor, the criminal, the killer, and death.
Abortion?
Sides with - the killer of defenseless babies
Against - Defenseless innocent babies
Death Penalty?
Sides with - The murdering criminal
Against - The innocent victim
Immigration?
Sides with - The law breaking criminal
Against - The law abiding citizen
Homosexuality?
Sides with - Disease and death
Against - Abstinence and life
Euthanasia?
Sides with - Death
Against - Life
Illegal Drugs?
Sides with - Overdoses and death
Against - Sobriety and life.
As I said, any position.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
I will use labels when they fitThanks
Science deniers, Creationists.
Apparently, so will he.
I guess creationists don't think they are just people, humans, folks...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
You seem to have a small problem with obsession and compulsion, I hope I won't have to block you.
I already have two stalkers and need no more.
Created: