Nanobite Riding Crystals and Intelligent Mud
A friend of mine recently used the following quote on an online forum:
Someone decided to reply, and then I put my twenty five cents in.
Me
Friend
Mr. Enlightened
Mr. Enlightened:
I did not mean to offend you however, This quote is from 1960. If you want to argue the point copy and paste something new or original. The only thing I have learned from your posts is that google is your friend. ;)
Friend:
Dude, I am posting stuff for the Glory of God...not for my glory. Offend me? For what? I am 43 years old. I hate arguments. Who is arguing? I apologize if I was "arguing." I hate arguments.
Me (to friend):
Have you seen "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed"?
Friend:
Yes; funny and scary!
Mr. Enlightened:
Yes, and found it very condescending. Mud animated by lightening... Sigh
Intelligent design is just a new way of saying creationism, it doesn't matter if it's Abraham's God, or Quetzalcoatl.
If they want to teach it there are many religious ...private schools that do.
Intelligent design is an inherent religious belief, evolution is a scientific theory.
Me (to Mr. Enlightened):
condescending
Interesting choice of words.
You stated earlier to Alfredo: "This quote is from 1960/The only thing I have learned from your posts is that google is your friend."
I’d say that sounds pretty condescending.
...Perhaps we should never quote anyone at all unless they spoke during the last 15 minutes? Hour? Month? Year? Maybe we should only quote when what they say is in line with what we believe.
But I guess Darwinist Evolutionary Theory is quite a relevant source-even though it is from the 1800s.
I myself believe that certain forms of evolution are true. There are facts that point at least to macro-evolution/adaptation. But I do reject Darwinian Evolution.
Science no more negates the existence of a creator than the existence of a creator negates science. Regardless, the honest, unbiased search for facts is what matters. So I cannot help but wonder why the atheistic/Darwinian evolution crowd is so determined to silence the Intelligent Design side. Last time I read some history that kind of resistance to, and suppression of, another side’s point of view was a hallmark of socialism and fascism.
Regarding Expelled…
I find it curious that you would call Expelled “condescending” while apparently ignoring Dawkin’s refusal to accept the possibility of intelligent design except in the case of “aliens”. His position on this matter is one of sheer, biased, atheistic dogma, not to mention an utterly disingenuous attempt to sidestep an issue he cannot just arrogantly explain away. A world renowned scientist claiming life on Earth may have come from aliens, but intelligent design is silly. Flying Spaghetti Monster anyone?
“Mud animated by lightening... Sigh”
Indeed, that’s just what I thought, except it seems that my assertion is on how ludicrous such an explanation for the origin of life is, while your protestation is that it was pointed out.
If you recall, Pasteur proved that spontaneous generation is not possible. He did this in a world teeming with life-where the enzymes and proteins and all the other “ingredients” for life were already present. He did this using the scientific method.
”Intelligent design is just a new way of saying creationism… If they want to teach it there are many religious ...private schools that do. Intelligent design is an inherent religious belief, evolution is a scientific theory.”
Intelligent Design is simply a theory based upon observations made by other scientists-observations that threaten the elitist atheistic ideology you seem to cling to so blindly.
Interesting that you admit in your own statement that evolution is a scientific theory while defending it as if it were fact. That’s quite a biased double standard-not very scientific. As far as teaching either in schools, apparently your “scientific” elitism stretches even into education.
You choose to believe that life started through spontaneous generation in a volatile atmosphere that was extremely hostile to life. You choose to believe this spontaneous generation of life may have occurred by a bolt of lightning striking some perfectly formulated pocket of life-generating mud-or perhaps by molecules “piggybacking” on the backs of crystals, or perhaps it is the perpetual “we don’t know”, or maybe by some aliens seeding Earth after their planet was seeded by other aliens, after their planet was seeded by other aliens-or were they crystals piggybacking on the backs of nanobites from Star Trek…” In short, you shouldn’t accuse others of an overactive imagination when you are suffering from delusions.
Not that I wanted to rant….
Someone decided to reply, and then I put my twenty five cents in.
Me
Friend
Mr. Enlightened
Mr. Enlightened:
I did not mean to offend you however, This quote is from 1960. If you want to argue the point copy and paste something new or original. The only thing I have learned from your posts is that google is your friend. ;)
Friend:
Dude, I am posting stuff for the Glory of God...not for my glory. Offend me? For what? I am 43 years old. I hate arguments. Who is arguing? I apologize if I was "arguing." I hate arguments.
Me (to friend):
Have you seen "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed"?
Friend:
Yes; funny and scary!
Mr. Enlightened:
Yes, and found it very condescending. Mud animated by lightening... Sigh
Intelligent design is just a new way of saying creationism, it doesn't matter if it's Abraham's God, or Quetzalcoatl.
If they want to teach it there are many religious ...private schools that do.
Intelligent design is an inherent religious belief, evolution is a scientific theory.
Me (to Mr. Enlightened):
condescending
Interesting choice of words.
You stated earlier to Alfredo: "This quote is from 1960/The only thing I have learned from your posts is that google is your friend."
I’d say that sounds pretty condescending.
...Perhaps we should never quote anyone at all unless they spoke during the last 15 minutes? Hour? Month? Year? Maybe we should only quote when what they say is in line with what we believe.
But I guess Darwinist Evolutionary Theory is quite a relevant source-even though it is from the 1800s.
I myself believe that certain forms of evolution are true. There are facts that point at least to macro-evolution/adaptation
Science no more negates the existence of a creator than the existence of a creator negates science. Regardless, the honest, unbiased search for facts is what matters. So I cannot help but wonder why the atheistic/Darwinian evolution crowd is so determined to silence the Intelligent Design side. Last time I read some history that kind of resistance to, and suppression of, another side’s point of view was a hallmark of socialism and fascism.
Regarding Expelled…
I find it curious that you would call Expelled “condescending” while apparently ignoring Dawkin’s refusal to accept the possibility of intelligent design except in the case of “aliens”. His position on this matter is one of sheer, biased, atheistic dogma, not to mention an utterly disingenuous attempt to sidestep an issue he cannot just arrogantly explain away. A world renowned scientist claiming life on Earth may have come from aliens, but intelligent design is silly. Flying Spaghetti Monster anyone?
“Mud animated by lightening... Sigh”
Indeed, that’s just what I thought, except it seems that my assertion is on how ludicrous such an explanation for the origin of life is, while your protestation is that it was pointed out.
If you recall, Pasteur proved that spontaneous generation is not possible. He did this in a world teeming with life-where the enzymes and proteins and all the other “ingredients” for life were already present. He did this using the scientific method.
”Intelligent design is just a new way of saying creationism… If they want to teach it there are many religious ...private schools that do. Intelligent design is an inherent religious belief, evolution is a scientific theory.”
Intelligent Design is simply a theory based upon observations made by other scientists-observations that threaten the elitist atheistic ideology you seem to cling to so blindly.
Interesting that you admit in your own statement that evolution is a scientific theory while defending it as if it were fact. That’s quite a biased double standard-not very scientific. As far as teaching either in schools, apparently your “scientific” elitism stretches even into education.
You choose to believe that life started through spontaneous generation in a volatile atmosphere that was extremely hostile to life. You choose to believe this spontaneous generation of life may have occurred by a bolt of lightning striking some perfectly formulated pocket of life-generating mud-or perhaps by molecules “piggybacking” on the backs of crystals, or perhaps it is the perpetual “we don’t know”, or maybe by some aliens seeding Earth after their planet was seeded by other aliens, after their planet was seeded by other aliens-or were they crystals piggybacking on the backs of nanobites from Star Trek…” In short, you shouldn’t accuse others of an overactive imagination when you are suffering from delusions.
Not that I wanted to rant….
posted by Bisley Joe at 6:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home