551. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #73548 by BillySands on September 25, 2007 at 8:45 am

Oh, and not we get to the really preposterous stuff! A baby born of a virgin? Is that possible? Not the last time I checked. I guess Mary just fabricated that to cover up her infidelity.

More likely it is a myth created to compete with the concurrant and similar mythologies of Mithras and Dionysis.

Isaiah 7:14 has nothing to do with predicting Jesus will be born of a virgin

552. Religion advances despite science (and thanks to Dawkins)

Comment #73489 by BillySands on September 25, 2007 at 5:09 am

Fear not Philip, you can use the lid of your tea pot as a shield of steel.

He is only doing what the good book commands http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_stone_your_whole_family/dt13_06-08.html
(Is it just me, or is that lego mum hot?)

553. Religion advances despite science (and thanks to Dawkins)

Comment #73483 by BillySands on September 25, 2007 at 4:46 am

Nurse, he (wee flea) is out of bed again!

Padded cell for Robertson!

Hi V, I stopped reading Revcorts stuff, it was pure gash! What thread was he on again? it may be good for a laugh.
Devolved is back (without dinosaurs) All we need now is Biz

554. Religion advances despite science (and thanks to Dawkins)

Comment #73466 by BillySands on September 25, 2007 at 3:33 am

Good point Goldy, I wouldnt want to share eternity with David.
However, in some respects, the concept of sin is a relative thing. There are no absolute moral standards, and so far David has failed to provide evidence they exist. We'll not hold our breath waiting for him to do so. BTW David, have you see the monkeys with justice thread - isn't evolution wonderful? http://www.richarddawkins.net/article,1676,Monkeys-show-sense-of-justice,Dr-David-Whitehouse-BBC
No sky fairy required!

555. Religion advances despite science (and thanks to Dawkins)

Comment #73438 by BillySands on September 25, 2007 at 2:20 am

Hey David, I dare you to open an uncensored thread on your site about attitudes to the pope, catholics, evolution and homosexuals - go on I dare you, then we will see some real fundie nut bags - and they will all be religious - go on! I dare you!

556. Talking Action Figure Jesus

Comment #73299 by BillySands on September 24, 2007 at 4:44 pm

Now you can have a jesus vs Barbie death match.

557. Talking Action Figure Jesus

Comment #73286 by BillySands on September 24, 2007 at 4:29 pm

You could pull the arms and legs off your sister's dolls and pretend they are lepers. Then Jesus could heal them.
How about bringing out genocidal joshua and murderous moses with real gravel throwing arm. Tey could have Dalek voices and say "exterminate non jews Ex-ter-min-ate!"

558. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #73265 by BillySands on September 24, 2007 at 3:51 pm

If you are unable to provide examples of increases in genetic information then the entire evolutionary argument falls over.

No it doesn't you moron! If you really knew what natural selection was, you would be so embarassed by that statement, and you come on here to tell us that we are wrong. No wonder we have nothing but contempt for you. You have been given many examples - try reading! How on earth does it fall over? Finding that dinosaur I keep asking for, that would make it fall over.

Creationists believe that the created kind possessed at creation all genetic information for rapid speciation to take place.

Evidence? let me guess, none! What typified a kind?

Natural selection involves merely the shuffling, rearrangement and degeneration of existing genetic information,

Natural selection is nothing of the sort- idiot! Go read a proper book you dishonest retard.
By the way, doubling genes can change body shape through gene dose effects. Why do you keep ignoring the mutation aspect of duplication? Why do you keep saying evolution works in a way it doesn't - are you so desperate to lie for your stupid beliefs?
I presume (although I doubt you know it) you are referring to Ubx mutations. Dont you know the main flight muscles of insects are not attached to wings anyway - oops - you just made an arse of yourself - again!

As for the antibiotic resistance - on one level, astraw man, on another, a lie go look up HORIZONTAL GENE TRANSFER and resistance!

Self creating matter. Information systems that appear by luck. Increasing complex genomes with no supportable evidence in operational science.

As a former god botherer, let me translate for the rational :"la la la I'm not listening. I'm ignoring your evidence la la la. I cant concieve how there could be a rational explanation for everything. Although I dont have the best intellect in the world I'm confident that I cant think of a naturalistic explanation, then there cant be one - because I want to feel special. Therefore, I, going to believe in a magic invisible god. La la la - wibble? what's that god? kill non-believers and dont touch my penis when I see pictures of Kylie?"

559. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #73158 by BillySands on September 24, 2007 at 9:55 am

This may be of interest concerning presbyterians and 6 day creationism
http://www.the-highway.com/creation_Gentry.html

560. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #73111 by BillySands on September 24, 2007 at 6:30 am

Isn't "increase/decrease in genetic information" a creationist straw man?

Too right it is! These people lie about how evolution works. the expect you to find an amoeba that aquires a new genome and becomes a T rex in one generation - Dishonest tits!

561. Religion advances despite science (and thanks to Dawkins)

Comment #73095 by BillySands on September 24, 2007 at 5:26 am

God, you're good, BillySands.

I owe it all to Philip brewing the holy tea of Quetz.

May the brew be with you

PS I see JemyM is not far from the kingdom of tea either. May Quetz make Jemy's pot flow over

562. Religion advances despite science (and thanks to Dawkins)

Comment #73061 by BillySands on September 24, 2007 at 2:56 am

Dawkins et al lay down a spiritual version of the gauntlet from DC Comics: "Are you with us or against us". That mentality should be consigned to the comic books where it belongs.

What, you mean comic books like the bible? Luke 11:23 "He who is not with Me is against Me"

563. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #73058 by BillySands on September 24, 2007 at 2:27 am

Ok so you're a scientist. Using the scientific method - observation >induction >hypothesis >test hypothesis by experiment >proof/disproof >knowledge – please provide me with evidence for evolution. I'd appreciate your references

Remember chromosome 2 you silly little troll? To remind you and it contains references http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

(I tried this question recently and got suggestions from people about how they believed mutations increased genetic information but no evidence.)

Liar!!!!!! Remember opsin genes? you never commented on them. I presume AIG doesnt have a page of lies on them then. Also, how many times do we have to tell you, you dont need an increase in "information" remember Alx-4?

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/101/52/18058

Then, we keep telling you about duplication + mutation. No wonder we think you are an ignorant ass. Now, dont try anch change the burden of proof, you were asked to provide a scientific basis of creationism. If you cant do that , then I will add my voice to the icreasing chorus telling you to fuck off.

I once concidered god existed, so I challenge you to read up properly on evolution without the lying
fundie commentries. Oh wait, i challenged you to do that in the past, and you couldn't. So dont dish out challenges when you cant do the same. What is this christian challenge bollocks anyway - "I challenged you to read the bible - if you dare" oooh, tremble trembe I've been challenged by someone who talks to invisible sky fairies- scary as fuck - not!

564. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72928 by BillySands on September 23, 2007 at 2:39 pm

Devolved, you are winning no converts here I look forward to you answering goldy's question - and mine, Epeeists, Robert's etc.

Great tea pot, all I can say is if you happen to be near Dundee, I wouldn't eat any of the local pies, sausages or stovies for a week or two

565. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72905 by BillySands on September 23, 2007 at 11:52 am

OK, I thought I'd give myself a laugh. I ceched this part of deluded's link http://biblicalgeology.net/content/view/46/43/
I cliked on the "is the biblical geological model scientific?" answer, and guess not, no answer was given, but we are told "Christian geologists have an advantage when it comes to history. Because they accept biblical history is accurate, they do not need to speculate about history. By taking the biblical account as an eyewitness record of past events they only need to speculate about how these affected geology."

Deluded, you just dont get it, do you? You care not for evidence, you are a muppet, no wonder you are not taken seriously here. Worst of all, you say these links are prfectly adequate. Despite the obvious reasons why they are not, you even tell us that they are even though you have neither the time or understanding to argue your case (and you expct us to waste our time) Get a grip, and I dont mean of your dick!

566. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72899 by BillySands on September 23, 2007 at 11:24 am

The article is perfectly adequate. I wonder why you are reluctant to read it?

Could it be brcause we have learned that they are shit and a total waste of our time replying to them. Just in case anyone hasn't come across Devolved's links, this one says it all. It is his proof that humans and dinosaurs co-existed http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/133/
have a needle and thread handy to repair your sides.

PS, want to buy some magic beans too?

567. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72820 by BillySands on September 23, 2007 at 3:46 am

How can these people believe that they are privy to some kind of "Truth" for which not a shred of evidence exists?

Hi captain underpants. I think Nothern bright has got it right. I wasnt brought up a christian as such, but it was forced on me at school. It wasn't till later that I became one. To believe this, you really have to shut off reason. What you do is you just accept that the bible is the ultimate source of truth about the universe. This gives you the frame work to interpret what is going on in your life - is god diciplining me, is the devil attacking me because I am so special to have god, god is blessing me with speed down the left wing (despite the fact I train and was already fast before convertion). If you cant get an answer from the bible about what to do or say in a particular situation, you turn to verses like Isaiah 55:9
"For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts".

So, you just assume that god knows best and has his reasons - because it says so in the bible. You even tell yourself that if you knew everything then you would be god, and you most certainly are not.
You also believe that you alone have a direct line to god, and those who disagree with particular aspects of your theology are not reading the bible in the correct spirit and importing their own agendas into the bible, and not god's. After all, you know you have been saved and are serious anbout it and totally committed to god, so everyone else must be wrong.
This is a seriously fucked up way of thinking and I would suggest it is a form om mental illness. It is also a delusion and mental slavery. It's definately nice to be normal again.

I think Devolved has buggered off again

568. Monkeys show sense of justice

Comment #72812 by BillySands on September 23, 2007 at 3:18 am

What I like about this is that it is yet another example that we are nothing special.
The religious also like to pretend that there is some sort of moral law out there that cant come about through evolution.
There was a good programme on BBC2 about them last night. Apparently the huffiness works with biscuits vs grapes too.
You can put two on either side of a clear partition with a small hole in it. On one side, one monkey has a has a jar of nuts sealed with a a tough plastic cover. The other monkey has a flint. What they found was that the monkey with the flint passed it to the other one who used it to open the jar. It then shared the nuts with the other one.
In the wild they use anvil stones to crack nuts. They sometimes have to carry the nuts several kilometers, and they pick up the hammer stones from the river several kilometers in the other direction - a nice example of forward planning. There was also footage of them using rocks as weapons against a puma. Pretty cool things really.

569. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72716 by BillySands on September 22, 2007 at 12:22 pm

nothern bright and corylus,

Let's not forget they delude themselves into thinking we dont want to believe in god - or answer to him so that we can carry on being nasty smelly sinners . It's the only way to account for our insanity, and the bible even tells them so:
2 peter 3:5 "For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: "
Then they can go away and feel specially chosen by god to have the "truth" revealed to them by the holy spirit - sad really.

570. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #72689 by BillySands on September 22, 2007 at 9:39 am

Interesting prophecy chart Corky. Strange the world is not filled with the glory of god. How was redemption achieved through the seed of woman before the covenant with Abraham. Jesus is not decended from david, because joseph is not his father and those messianic prophecies are so lame and out of context etc ....
How did those other cults deal with their failed prophecies?

mistakes of moses is available here

571. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72655 by BillySands on September 22, 2007 at 4:55 am

It was actually the phylogenetic similarities between small pox and cow pox that let Jenners approach be sucessfull. He may not have known that, but this relatedness is what underpinned his success in generating a small poxvaccine. Using this knowledge today, we should be able to make vaccines that are effective against several closely related species.
Does devolved claim that his "loving" god made these nasty diseases too?

The problem concerning HIV vaccines are discussed here http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1857809

572. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72650 by BillySands on September 22, 2007 at 4:38 am

Why is it that fundamentalists, as soon as they open their mouths, turn out to be unutterably stupid?

Not only that, they lie. see here for example: I checked the flagellum page at "truthinscience" http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/240/63/
they cite this paper as evidence that the flagellum gave rise to the ttss and not the otherway around http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/104/17/7116
they say

The authors disagree with the idea that the flagellum has evolved from the TTSS, and write that TTSS genes are "derived from" (p. 7120) flagellar genes. There is some evidence that the simpler structure of the TTSS could have evolved from the more complex structure of the flagellum, not vice versa.

However, the paper actually says

The structural features of the flagellum, along with the evidence of homology between FliI and ATP synthase subunits and between MotA/B and the secretion proteins TolQ-TolR, suggests that it originated as a primitive secretion system (16), first involving ATPase and then adding the rod, hook, and filament components by gene duplication and diversification. Its original role as a secretion apparatus is also supported by the clear links between the flagellum and the TTSS, a protein delivery system whose genetic architecture is similar to and derived from a flagellar gene complex (17, 20).

The paper also points out that some proteins are not necessary for flagellar function, further reducing its complexity.
Typical lying fundies!

573. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72642 by BillySands on September 22, 2007 at 4:15 am

What basis do you have for claiming that vaccines and cures are in any way dependent on a belief in evolution.

Erm, Anigenic variabiliy! how about evolution of drug resistance too. Selective chemotherapy also has it's basis in phylogenetic differences too.

574. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72637 by BillySands on September 22, 2007 at 3:52 am

Great tea pot,

I'm not obsessed with it. The views of the religious on homosexuality are a serious challenge to their position of "moral superiority" It shows how following a book poisons minds. This was a big issue when I went to see Ken Ham talk too. According to him, believing in Darwinism leads to the acceptance of homosexual practices - which he considers evil.
As long as idiots keep comming on this site saying christianity is right, I'm going to keep challenging them on their religion induced bigotry - seems fair

EDIT I see you removed your question, but I'll keep my answer for future reference

575. Row Brews Over DUP Call for Schools to Teach Creationism

Comment #72635 by BillySands on September 22, 2007 at 3:26 am

I saw Epeeist's response to Devolved's post first, and unfortunately, I predicted what devolved had written. Evolution is not science eh?, tell that to molecular biologists, ethologists, anatomists, zoologists, paleontologists, botanists etc....
Creationists who do "science" are being highly selective and dishonest. I saw Ken Ham recently, and his pitch was all about upholding biblical authority - not objective science.
Any way, devolved, you ran away last time before telling me if you found the dinosaur fossils that would kill off that nasty secular relgion of evolution that is responsible for atheism, homosexuality and unpatriotic Americans. So, have you?
I dont know why, but I've somehow got it into my head that you are Irish. If so, that is a good enough reason not to teach creationism, if all it does is close off your mind and defend a position that is refuted by the evidence. A position that you yourself say that you are not qualified to look at impartially. A position that you have previously said is supported only by your own prejudices.

576. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #72223 by BillySands on September 20, 2007 at 2:42 pm

Of course Goldy, Chickens sometimes produce toothed mutants. A fact Biz doesnt seem to like http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000E9965-99A6-13FB-99A683414B7F0000

577. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #72206 by BillySands on September 20, 2007 at 2:22 pm

I cant be bothered getting into a debate with a creationist at the moment, but only fundies claim Archaeopteryx was a bird. It was actually more dinosaur like than bird like http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/archaeopteryx/info.html

578. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #72192 by BillySands on September 20, 2007 at 2:02 pm

Walk
You asked about DNA, this link contains some nice examples (I also recomend his book)http://www.richarddawkins.net/article,232,The-Fact-of-Evolution,Sean-Carroll--NPR-Science-Friday
For creationists, this is pearls before swine.

Perhaps the good reverend can tell us who the father of joseph was
Matthew 1:16
and Jacob was the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
or
Luke 3:23
Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli

Looks like Allah says Christians are off to hell(the family of Imran 3)3:4 Aforetime, for a guidance to mankind; and hath revealed the Criterion (of right and wrong). Lo! those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, theirs will be a heavy doom. Allah is Mighty, Able to Requite (the wrong).

I dont think even Biz shows this level of fundamentalism where he thinks an argument can be won by quoting a piece of self contradicting bronze age mythology.
I think if the god of the bible existed he should kiss every human's arse and beg forgiveness for his many crimes against us

579. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #72111 by BillySands on September 20, 2007 at 11:11 am

Where do they clone people like revcort? Why does he quote the bible at us? His is the saddest form of fundie intellect. I like this verse when listening to biblical preaching "only a simpleton believes everything they are told" Prov:14:15

I've yet to hear a theist give a real reason to show that homosexuality is wrong. You can say why rape and murder are wrong, but why homosexuality? Ah the delights of the holy bile (spelling deliberate). As for his argument about normals in nature, rape, homomosexuality, murder, terriorial aggression, polygamy and polyandry, stealing and canabalism all occur in nature. Is he then saying it's natural, so it must be "right"? Actually, the bible endorses many of these things-strange double standards.

The bible says that sabbath breakers must be stoned, but Jesus broke the sabbath. If god is above his own laws, then God could have homosexual tendancies.

I think he also gets his lieing anti evolution propaganda from Ken Ham. Anyone seen many scientists give a good scientific argument againt evolution? The anti evolutionaty scientists i know do not doubt evolution for scientific reasons, but because the believe the bible.
He can pray for us, but we will have to think for him

580. Against the grain: There are questions that science cannot answer

Comment #71965 by BillySands on September 20, 2007 at 2:51 am

Is there another RD out there that we haven't met, or is this person down on all fours, howling at the moon whilst the invisible sky fairy allows buddy holly into her head to play music in a room full of padded wall paper?
I find it bizarre that anyone who follows the blood thirsty baby eating christian god sould criticise any moral position. Still, they dont seem to want to understand what they are complaining against enough to actually pay attention to minor details like facts - if only they could see.

If Theology was simply a discussion about the hypothetical idea of a God it would not be so bad. However, the taint of the true believer is clear in their assumption that their sub-standard philosophical ideas can be applied to other subjects...

This is so true, I get it all the time, then you point out the flaws in the arguement, and it just bounces off them. What indeed does theology have to say on consciousness, free will, motivation, emotion, true origins etc? Bugger all! that's what.
I would love to hear the flea attempt justify evolution through theology - that wouldnt be too pretty for folk who don't like to see dimb animals being ripped apart. I presume thats why he runs away to mummy when the challenge pops up

581. Oxford's Christian colleges 'are not suitable for school-leavers'

Comment #71551 by BillySands on September 19, 2007 at 2:53 am

Wont be long until theology is lumped in with the rest of mythology :-)

582. The Fleas Are Multiplying!

Comment #69937 by BillySands on September 13, 2007 at 8:21 am

I suppose my dislike of idiots such as wee flea could be described as a fundamental position! What do you think?

I think it is entierly justified. Why should we quietly tolerate the inane ramblings of a deluded fundamentalist buffoon who has abandoned reason, runs from debate and whose only purpose is to wind others up? Someone once said he has the mental capacity of road kill. I spoke out about that comment at the time, but evidence has changed my mind and I agree with that comment now. So much for fundamentalism by the athiests then.

583. The Fleas Are Multiplying!

Comment #69873 by BillySands on September 13, 2007 at 3:38 am

I've actually taken to praying, briefly but sincerely, some evenings to god (any god) to reveal himself (herself, itself) to me if s/he really does exist and to overcome my scepticism if it is misplaced. Seems the least I can do.

Come on J The christian god says you cant test him, and if you dont find him, then it is all your fault for not looking properly. Oh, wait a mo,jesus let Thomas test him, and Jesus also appeared to Paul (who was actively persecuting him) Now I am confused. Test- dont test, seek, dont seek. How to make sense of this?

Hmm, maybe the christian god is not real?

David, if god can do anything he wants, can he make asquare circle and keek it round?

584. The Fleas Are Multiplying!

Comment #69685 by BillySands on September 12, 2007 at 7:38 am

I'm more concerned with the child abuse aspects of foisting a religion on someone yet to acquire the tools to make a choice and at the same time creating an artificial 'them and us' division which can only deepen over time.

I wonder what the fleas' opinion of this concerning Ken Ham ministries is?

I remember Flea spreading lies about a witch hunt directed at creationist biochemists in the UK. Do his earlier comments not imply a simmilar attitude he claims to have about Ham?

585. The Fleas Are Multiplying!

Comment #69641 by BillySands on September 12, 2007 at 2:39 am

J
The problem with Ham is that it is a question of biblical authorirty. All the bible must be accepted as true. Evidence does not matter to him, and there were certainly a lot of aproving grunt from the audience. More worrying was his moral teachings. Atheism has no morality and allows same sex marriages - which are evil - those got the loudest grunts of approval. He works on indoctrinating the fundies. He truly is a gift to atheism. Let "god" sort it out, if being non existent doesn't handicap her too much.
Srange David feels he can comment on evolution when he cant refute Ham. Ham is the true voice of the bible, so I say let's encourage him and give the christians enough rope to hang themselves -unless someone can actually show the bible allows evolution. Evolution is true. The problem is a question of theology, which bears no relationship to reality.
David, are you disobeying Jesus and not providing evidence when asked to do so?
So much for following the bible.
Hows the fee church child abuse mission comming along then - there were a few kids forced to listen to Ham, so I guess its on target.

586. The Fleas Are Multiplying!

Comment #69507 by BillySands on September 11, 2007 at 2:09 pm

- Doubt it. I'll lay odds of 1/100 that within a few minutes we will have the Pope, I once went to a Scottish Church meeting which was terrible etc. It used to be sweet. Not its just become obcessive. Best ignored.

HA HA HA Wee flea, you are sooooo funneee, please stop it, by nuts have expoloded.
Nice to see you using the time honoured biblical tradition of making predictions after the event. Gosh, If I'm obsessive, maybe I should be writing a book about David's book and posting on his site - despite the censoring!
Hey Dave, I heard you met a rude atheist once (that you provoked) and haven't shut the fuck up about it since

It's quite disturbing the levity with which you treat your church's involvement in these matters. Still, you have made homophobic comments here before, so I'm not suprised

SG does raise an interesting point, these churches are facilitating the teaching of frothing mouthed fundie hate - quite disgusting really and David is allowing it.

I hate to say this but I agree with you

Very telling comment on David's anti Atheist prejudices.

this is one Free Church he will never be allowed to speak in (at least not without someone sensible to give a rebuttal). I actually think that the majority of Free Churches would not allow him.

Ah, censorship, imagine RD saying he wont lets creationists post on this site. The problem is David, Ham reads the bible properly. Where on earth does the bible talk of evolution?
Convince me that the bible is evolution friendly, and I'll even help you refute it - shame you dont do proper debate like Mark T does.

If possible could you do me a big favour. Send me your refutation of his material? I am editor of our denominations magazine and I would like to run a whole issue on the creation/evolution debate. If I am to critique Ken Ham I need as much real info as I can get.

That what I like to see, someone who has clearly investigated what he claims to believe and is able to defend it himself. Too stupid to do it yourself? If you cant rebut it, how do you know he is wrong? And the bible does say nothing about evolution. Can it be reality is finally dawning? Science good, bible shit. I say keep up he good work Ken, you are preaching the true biblical message and showing its absurdity

How about puting your money where your mouth is then and present some evidence for God. i guess if you refuse, you are disobeying god : "But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect," 1 Peter 3:15. You can look up the definitions of the last couple of words on line if you want, because I dont think they mean what you seem to think they mean.

And yes I read Grayling. In my view the worst of the New Atheist publishing. If ever anyone is a flea then a man who rehashes six short essays and puts them in a book charging $15 is one. His chapter three is wrong on almost every count.

$15? have they got a different currency in Dundee? It's only about £5-6. DOES ANYONE ELSE SUSPECT dAVE HASN'T READ IT AND HAS ONLY READ AMAZON REVIEWS?

J
Funny that you improved his book by writing the word bollocks, I improved his vitriolic rant by mumbling the word bollocks.

Really suprised the Flea wasn't there burning crosses and stuff

587. The Fleas Are Multiplying!

Comment #69466 by BillySands on September 11, 2007 at 11:00 am

Hey Flea,
Just thought you would like to know, I spent last thursday evening in the company of a bunch of homophobic YECs. Where I hear you ask? Well, it Was Dowanvale free church of Scotland in Partick. Tell me, are all wee frees like this? I went to see that that purveyor of gospel truth Ken Ham there. It was disgusting - all those aproving grunts at his homophobic teachings. Is this what they teach in your church? All I can say is I'm glad I wasn't wearing a celtic top - what with them believing the pope to be the antichrist and all that. Ehy weren't you there puting them right/ Oh that's right, you agree with them.
Catch you later dude.
VanYoungman You must have the second sight :-)

588. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #69398 by BillySands on September 11, 2007 at 5:47 am

Better still God could make Pi equal just 3?

Strange you should mention that Lee, according to the word od god, Pi does indeed = 3 http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/math.html#pi

Praize Quetz for he put this question in your mind. Lets have some Assam

589. The Emptiness of Theology

Comment #69271 by BillySands on September 10, 2007 at 9:14 am

Some interesting points. I posted it on a Christian friend's blog. That should stir things up a bit.
The typical christian respose will be some thing like "but it gives us hope".
Stem cell research gives us all hope, and it is more likely to be realised

590. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #69265 by BillySands on September 10, 2007 at 8:28 am

Seems eminently reasonable to me, these were presumably bronze age people who may have come across others with iron weapons.

Actually, that is another problem, not only is God not then omnipotent*, this all supposedly happened in the middle bronze age. Probably what was happening was the Jewish propaganda machine were saying that they were going to wipe out their enemies, then they failed. I believe later they put it down to idol worship or something, but god did clearly say that he would give them the promised land. I think something similar happened to gods promise to make solomon's desendents sit for ever on the throne of David. There has been no such king since Zedekiah's reign ended in 587/6 BCE. Again the bible writers had to make excuses for gods unequivocal promise being broken. Will need to look into this more.

* Something struck me recently. Is it possible for god to make square circles or make 2+2=71 while keeping the values the same? Therefore, there are somethings he cant do.

591. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #69263 by BillySands on September 10, 2007 at 8:17 am

Philip,
Good old Zeus, he used to like shooting his bolt and getting virgins pregnant. One such child was Dionysis who could turn water into wine and returned from the dead.
As Justin Martyr said: "When we say that the Word, who is the first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter (Zeus)." (First Apology, ch. Xxiv)

Anyone else thinking ripoff? (and I'm not referring to a cheap circumsicion here :-) )

592. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #69242 by BillySands on September 10, 2007 at 6:20 am

Hi Lee,

The whole sun stopping thing would have made sense to the Hebrews. To them the universe was geocentric. The sun was though to have 3 winows that allowed it to enter the sky and three that allowed it to exit. The position of these accounted for the seasons. If you have time, read 1Enoch. That goes into more details about Hebrew cosmology. In fact, Jude quotes from this book as though it were inspired. How wrong could god have been?

Here is one of my favorite strange verses:

"And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron."
— Judges 1:19

Think what they could have done to god if they had Panzer VIs or Daleks

593. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #69215 by BillySands on September 10, 2007 at 3:12 am

Hi Mark, You are getting a real workout here. Theo is back not a moment too soon.

I just want to comment some points here

Firstly, the existence of life itself, in all its vast variety, very beautifully but delicately balanced in relation to the physical environment, strikes me as demanding far more careful consideration than (e.g.) RD gives it in TGD

One problem here is that environments change and species go extinct (although change can drive speciation) Natural selection accounts for adaptation. Before we pick this up, it would be helpful if you could tell us your understanding of the way natural selection works, and how important it's role is in shaping organisms - that should make sure we know where each other stands on the subject.
Also, what is your view on the idea that all animals were vegetarian before the fall? How do you fit adaptation into this, when T rex or Carcharinus megaladon were clearly adapted to predation, as are lions today. What about parasites that can live in no other way than on or in the bodies of other animals?
What about soft water fish, such as the Discus? These would not survive a global flood - they can be hard enough to keep alive in well maintained aquaria. How could they have adapted to soft water and survive the flood?

but it seems to me that evolutionary theory doesn't have any obvious place even to begin to discuss how or why we possess minds at all, far less minds capable of the staggeringly complex tasks we do without apparent effort, yet take so much for granted. By contrast, Genesis 1 says that humankind was made "in the image of God", implying that we are given some (albeit limited) measure of the capabilities of the creator; I see the mind, and more particularly, human intellectual capabilities, as part of what that description is about.

This seems somewhat circular, in that you are using thebible to define reality. However, we have given you some reasons why our mind gives us an advantage. As has also been pointed out, other animals can solve problems too. It seems that you decide - without giving justification - that humans are the cut off point of what constitutes being made in the image of god (again circular). You claim that we are given some limited capabilities, but so then are octopi abd squirrels. Would you claim that they are made in the image of god too?

Again, we come to the who created the creator argument. It is circular reasoning to say that he always existed, because you have decided that he exists. Moreover, without the bible, you cant argue against a created creator. I personally thing the fact we dont know does not provide a reason to believe in god. I could be anything and our current knowlegde is so limited. To me, it is a god of the gaps arguement.

594. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #68903 by BillySands on September 9, 2007 at 4:02 am

Hi Mark, I hope you didn't think I meant predictable in a bad way. You actually did not follow the standard Christian response here, which is good. One of the things i like about having you here is that you do genuinely make me have to be thorough. Any way, the word you refer to in Gen 1:20 is "uwph", defined in strongs thus: from uwph; a bird (as covered with feathers, or rather as covering with wings), often collectively bird, that flieth, flying, fowl. The word is clearly associated with named birds in lev. 11:13. In Lev 17:13, the word appears again associated with fowl that contain blood (rules out insects etc arguing haemolymph is blood in this context would be strange). However, in lev11:20 we have the word used to convey something that creeps on all fours. These cant be insects, these creep on all sixes and there is a specific word for bat "atalleph". It is possible that to the zoologically ignorant though, that a bat is just a funny bird. It looks like the hebrew is far from conclusive yet again.

Do you agree though that the other verse I quote refers to all living things? I presume in your view, sea creatures died too, but they are not specifically mentioned, then we have the problem of pressure and the likelyhood a tree would survive. I find it telling it was an olive leaf the bird found. Not an elm, a eucalyptus, bambooshoot or mahogany leaf.

Perhaps we could shift from tyre to the flood if you want. The evidence is very clear that it did not happen.

Do you think that some animals were extict before the flood then?

595. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #68738 by BillySands on September 8, 2007 at 11:18 am

Mark, lets look a bit more at Ezekiel 26:12 in context:

"For thus says the Lord GOD, "Behold, I will bring upon Tyre from the north Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses, chariots, cavalry and a great army. 8 "He will slay your daughters on the mainland with the sword; and he will make siege walls against you, cast up a ramp against you and raise up a large shield against you. 9 "The blow of his battering rams he will direct against your walls, and with his axes he will break down your towers. 10 "Because of the multitude of his horses, the dust raised by them will cover you; your walls will shake at the noise of cavalry and wagons and chariots when he enters your gates as men enter a city that is breached. 11 "With the hoofs of his horses he will trample all your streets. He will slay your people with the sword; and your strong pillars will come down to the ground. 12 "Also they will make a spoil of your riches and a prey of your merchandise, break down your walls and destroy your pleasant houses, and throw your stones and your timbers and your debris into the water." NASB

This is describing events relating to Nebuchadnezzar as outlined in verse 7. It is telling of the comming destruction by the Babylonians. verse 12 is clearly linked temporally to this event, therefore the casting of buildings into the sea relates to this period, not that of Alexander. It is reasonable to assume that lay means to throw in an act of destruction, not construction. Furthermore, if we read on, it talks about reducing tyre to a bare rock (v14). Clearly the destruction refers to the Island, which never happened

596. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #68670 by BillySands on September 8, 2007 at 4:06 am

Too much to catch up with at the o, but briefly,

Billy, you committed a basic error by not completing the quote. Let me do that for you:


... upon the face of the ground; both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth.
There is no mention of vegetation, which while you might suppose from the KJV's translation "substance" could be included, evidently from context is not counted as "living substance" in the sense you presume.

No basic error here Mark, I am aware what the rest says. It is just giving examples. Pterodactyls are not specifically mentioned either. By your logic, that would mean they are not living substances. I could just have easily given you Gen 6:17"I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish..
I can guess your response, I am prepared :-)

597. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #68491 by BillySands on September 7, 2007 at 9:45 am

But that is not inconsistent with the Bible account! According to the detail in Genesis 8:11, at least one tree (and presumably in fact, many trees) survived the flood...

Interesting point Mark. However, Genesis 7:23 "And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground"
Also, the oldest bristle cone pines occur at an upper limit of 3354 metres. The flood covered everest, so Prometheus must have been under at least 5500 metres of water. That is a pressure of around 533 atmospheres, or about a ton per sq inch. It's just not going to survive. I briefly checked, but couldn't find any info, but assuming a fllod occurred and it survived, it should be recorded in its rings. That of course would not prove the flood (other climatic factors could be responsible), but absence of such a record would disprove the flood

598. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #68375 by BillySands on September 7, 2007 at 3:16 am

Hi Epeeist,

Loved the picture of the monkey spanking the creationist.

Ham also mentioned a fossil spark plug as evidence of a young earth. debunked here http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/coso.html
It just gets wierder and wierder

599. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #68278 by BillySands on September 6, 2007 at 3:35 pm

Just when I whant to go to bed, another post appears :-(

But have you never asked yourself - given your standpoint (I presume) that evolution by natural selection is the reason why living things have the properties they do – why:
(a) human beings can see the stars at all;

Well you try competing in this world wearing a blindfold for a day and see how far you get

(b) we have a consciousness to know that we are seeing the stars;

Intelligence allows communication. communication allows cooperation or planning things, such as setting traps for food, finding food, out witting predators/competitors etc

(c) we are endowed with the intellectual and physical capabilities sufficient for us, by the development and application of technology, to observe that in fact there are apparently enormous numbers of stars out there;

See above. You cant deny that technology - even as simple as making clothes from animal skins allows us to exploit our enviroment and exploit new ones

(d) despite our obvious inability to mentally grasp those numbers in any physical (unary) sense, we have minds that enable us to easily contemplate and work mathematically with such huge numbers, including the simple but potent mechanism of based number representation (e.g. decimal);

See above

(e) we can create poetic language to describe the universe and invoke emotion in others by doing so, even by reference to such seemingly remote and intangible objects as stars;

Girls like that stuff, probably because it implies intelligence and good social skills, indicating a good provider

(f) and all that despite the fact that, apart from casting tiny amounts of light on us at night, the stars do not interact with us in any meaningful way, at the level of our day-to-day lives?

They do intreract; calendars and navigation for example, but why ponder them? Most likely a by product of all the advantages above. Have you considered why hallucinogenic drugs can alter your brain? If there was a soul, it should be independant of such physical influences

600. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #68271 by BillySands on September 6, 2007 at 3:16 pm

Zaphod,
Interesting about changing the laws of physics. So much for the fine tuned hypothesis. Perhaps Epeist could comment more on this.
Philip
Normally more than one isotope is used. I think JC posted this befrore:
http://www.asa3.org/aSA/resources/Wiens.html

Young earth creationists also have the problem that we have tree ring records going back 30 000 years and the oldest tree in the world is older than the date of the flood.
http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2007/07/oldest-organisms-on-earth.html

I trust Quetz won his game