Creationists are a joke?

[Kristoffer]

Evolution, good enough for the Bishop of Rome. Good enough for the ArcBishop of Canterbury, good enough for many klergypeople...

but bad too the non-sane.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGbdomlBnJM

Parodie of horrible crætionism in clown paint rap. its a good summary

Its sad that some people can be so awfull ignorant?

ps i not attacking christians...My grandfather was one.

[Kristoffer]

But ignorance can be funny.

[zoegirl]

For saying you are not attacking Christians you are doing an smashing good job of it.

[Kristoffer]

Thank you! I would like to point out that the bible is a book, it was written by men, edited by men. could you think of god as only a concept? Is god your highest ideal?

if you put all your faith in god, how much faith would be left for humans?

­°we just consider it, some help. A test, faith needs backing up right? What's so scary about evolution

[zoegirl]

SO you admit that you came here to attack CHristianity?

I would suggest that you read the board purposes and guidelines.

[Kristoffer]

nej i dont admit that. I admit that i came here to test it to see if Kristus is good

[Gman]

Thank you! I would like to point out that the bible is a book, it was written by men, edited by men. could you think of god as only a concept? Is god your highest ideal?

if you put all your faith in god, how much faith would be left for humans?

­°we just consider it, some help. A test, faith needs backing up right? What's so scary about evolution

Nothing is wrong with evolution.. It's only when you take God out of it that it becomes corrupt. Another word for it is naturalism or materialism or that we can define everything through them.. We cannot..

[Kristoffer]

I could accept God alongside evolution, just have to decide which god and why. If there is a good reason to follow a particular deity, then everyone should. (although obviously people should be free to choose)

Do you think that all Athiests are naturalists? Because it only requires to not believe in god/s, so you can believe in spirits and afterlives too, although most of them don't accept supernatural things

[Proinsias]

That ICP parody was awful. What really surprised me is that the ICP original, which is linked on the right hand side of youtube, wasn't that bad, if you're familair with earlier works. ICP seem to have grown up at least a tiny bit since I bought the Great Milenko about 15 years ago.

Is the Christian horrorcore guy that I recall posting here a while back still around?

[Kristoffer]

Of course it is awful, how could anyone believe MAGNETS are miraculous? All those things are very mundane and explainable, why try to think they are miracles?

If I saw a real miracle, perhaps I would believe it, just there would have to be no trickery.

Ja well...I am sure there are funny versions of evolution too, funny how the fundamentalisms poeple really ruin things for everyone

[gralan]

I could accept God alongside evolution, just have to decide which god and why. If there is a good reason to follow a particular deity, then everyone should. (although obviously people should be free to choose)

Do you think that all Athiests are naturalists? Because it only requires to not believe in god/s, so you can believe in spirits and afterlives too, although most of them don't accept supernatural things

now that's funny.

[Legatus]

Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
You note that it does NOT say HOW God created these plants, or how long it took, therefor, biblically, evolution is possible. In fact, it says "let the EARTH' (or land, world, etc) which suggestes it is an earthly process. Thus, the bible does not deny evolution, in fact, it demands it. The one exception, mankind, which makes sense when you think about it, if sentient beings have souls, and can go to heaven, what do you do with half sentient beings?

The one problem with evolution, however, is...<drumroll>... science. Sure, it might be physically possible, but all indications are that it is statistically impossible by a huge amount. One simple problem, every amino acid in any kind of life must be "left handed amino acid", but if you create any they always come out half laft handed and half right. If even ONE in even the simplest life is right handed, that critter dies. Therefor it is like someone who takes many very ordinary heads or tails coins, and is able to flip them way up in the air and have them land on the ground, bounce and roll around, and always land heads up. To do that would take essentially infinite computing power of all the possible forces that effect those coins in time and space, and use that to know exactly what forces to apply with your thumb to make sure it lands heads up. And that just that one little part, not even counting that you must form a lot of rare and short lived molecules, assemble them into many small molecular machines, attach them together exactly correctly, include some method, all every complex, to code and decode genetic information so it can reproduce (not only the method to do so, but the exact correct code already on it), etc. This is why many now say that evolution is impossible, although my reading is that the bible demands it, and the fact that it happens absolutly REQUIRES a being of infinite intelligence to plan it, like that coin tossing above.

Such a being, of infinte power and intelligence, negates most world religions. Most religions have a god that says "do x and I will bring you to paradise", but an infinite being does not need YOU to do anything, such a being could do anything you could do a thousand times better. Therefor, the only logical choice, since a God MUST exist due to the statistical impossibility of life (to say nothing of the big bang) is Christianity, since only Christianity has a God where God does everything and you do nothing.

The only reasons that creationism exists as per the video above, is first, they havent apperently realised that it is in fact possible for a God of infinite intelligence to not only dream up what is, but all possible combinations of what could be, and thus be able to do the statistically impossible. Second, Satan saw science starting up, and realised that he needed to seperate the church from it, so as to make them look stupid, and to try and keep science (which was invented almost entirely by Christians using Christian principles) from finding out too much. Now, you might not believe in Satan, but I could say I don't believe in you, but you don't then dissapear in a puff of smoke, do you? Thus satan has maneuvered many into believeing a fable, not stated in scripture, called young earth creationism, which has become increasingly divirced from science or even reason, not to mention the plain text of the bible.

BTW, 'scientists" are aware of the problems listed above, their solution, invent an infinite number of other dimentions to get around the statistics problem. The problem with that, the evidence for any other dimentions is none, zilch, zero, nana. Other dimentions are, by defination, outside this natural one, and are therefor "supernatural" by defination, and are believed in because of <drumroll> blind faith (hence the quotation marks around scientists).

Conclusion, the only scientific, logical, reasonable beliefe is that there is a God, and the Christian God is it. To believe otherwise is to believe in the supernatural based on blind faith. Either way, you are following a religion. So, do you want the reasonable, evidence supported one, or the unreasonable, blind faith only one?

Note, this is the short form, I just got here, and am a slow and clumsy typer, so it will take time to get ti all down in any kind of legible form.

[Jehoram]

Your assumption that the predominant Chirality of amino acids in natural organic systems is a matter of the statistical chances of a reaction producing only l-proteins is a straw man argument.Amino acids are Made by enzymes that build molecules to a template that includes chirality . So it is not a matter of random chance that biological systems produce ""left handed amino acids "" .

[Legatus]

Your assumption that the predominant Chirality of amino acids in natural organic systems is a matter of the statistical chances of a reaction producing only l-proteins is a straw man argument.Amino acids are Made by enzymes that build molecules to a template that includes chirality . So it is not a matter of random chance that biological systems produce ""left handed amino acids "" .

The operative words here are "THAT BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS". We are here talking about the creation of life on a lifeless earth, there WERE NO BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS. The scientists were able to make some amino acids using electricity on what they believed was "primordial soup", however, since there were no biological systems, and thus no enzymes and certainly no template, they come out half left handed and half right handed, and it took very carefull filtering to separate even most of the left handed ones from the right handed.

Sooo, tell me, how do you get ONLY (100%, not even one right handed) left handed amino acids when there are no biological systems, no enzymes, and no template?