101. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182933 by clearmind on May 21, 2008 at 6:16 am

Al rawandi loses it again?
(Clearmind can't even figure out that I was just trying to get his goat.... Hey wait, clearmind, in your part of the world, do they have sex with goats... and if so, do they count as a wife or concubine?)


(Do they have sex with goats...)

Two blind men....
and do you?

Oh you got me. I am so afraid. Please you are so smart. Oh man this guy is killing me. I have got one wife. What about you? Still you did not answer my question; How old banana is?

102. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182862 by clearmind on May 21, 2008 at 4:04 am

(Seriously? How has Clearmind not been banned by now? Now he's suggesting Al-Rawandi is a paedophile/involved with Fanusi, and has mentioned Anna again. What the hell?)

Ban him again? Al rawandi STARTED IT. He offended 1.5 billion Muslims already. As a believer, this is really UGLY. You keep swearing and smearing because you want to insult Jesus and other prophets? A SIGN OF WEAKNESS a sign of losing battle as a last resort. Do this kind of attitude displays what kind of personality evolins have! This is really so sad.

No intelligence allowed
No nice personality allowed.

Swearing and smearing is the ace card on this web page.

103. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182858 by clearmind on May 21, 2008 at 3:57 am

(Clearmind, are you Turkish? What do you think of Harun Yahya)

(Well he is from Turkey and his argument about creation is very overwhelming. I suggest you to read it. If you go to google and write creation of God you can have it.)

104. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182857 by clearmind on May 21, 2008 at 3:55 am

(So there are multiple "prophets", in different times, which preach this message.

There are also multiple people in different times which preach alternate messages. Yet I suspect you would not call them prophets.)

Would you please tell me which prophets say the the thinsg that conflict?

105. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182849 by clearmind on May 21, 2008 at 3:30 am

(Al, I reckon you're right about murkymind being muslim. I debated a muslim for a while and he never could understand that physical and civil laws are not the same either.)

Your brain and IQ is not enough where I am from and What religion I belong to. Keep guessing? It is getting funnier. May be I am Mormon Oops I slipped it(!)

Oh man! It is getting funnier and funnier to tease evolins' IQ if there ..........

106. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182847 by clearmind on May 21, 2008 at 3:23 am

RIMMER RIMS
(I'd assumed emptyhead was Pakistani from the speech rhythms and some of the phrases. Any chance?)
You are very smart rimmer? What is your IQ? So you don't like Pakistanis? It is not good. Now discrimnation page added.

107. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182844 by clearmind on May 21, 2008 at 3:19 am

Hadith when the Quran is held to be complete. It certainly can't be complete if there are Hadith required to fully understand God's will and all that jazz.)....

Last two weeks I spent my free time reading Qur'an's translation and the prophet Mohammed's life.
To my understanding, Hadiths are the interpretations of Qur'an and explain them in detail. They are not separated.

108. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182842 by clearmind on May 21, 2008 at 3:15 am

Well well evolins are at it again;
I am Christian
I am Muslim
And I am Jewish
So what?
But Thank God I am a human being that I can think I did not come from a water worm.
The funny part
Once I was Russian
Now I am Malasian
May be Pakistanise or Turkish.
Next is I am Sweden?

History repeats
To Al Rawandi AND TO THE SAME KIND AS HIM
If you want to SLANDER something using by my name or getting name same as mine or do something similar became a typical attitude of atheists, thanks to you and a few of you because you are desperate this is what an atheist does when he is stuck,; TO ATTACK congratulations, you are displaying a very good attitude on behalf of this web page. You know the rule; bad words belong to the owner of the mouth it spreads. I do not know you, but I am married and I have an eight year old daughter. I am not desperate. I am believer. The best thing is that I am not swearing, slandering, TWISTING AND BEING FUNNY UNLESS I TALK ABOUT ET when necessary.

Al growling and smearing rawandi?

How is it your slandering and smearing going? Oh man? You don't have to tell your private your life to us. But if you wanna go on, be our guest. The more you talk like that the more you describe your life to us.
You know the rule;
The actions and words of those who do. by zara


Two blind people are eating their dinner, meatballs. One blind asked, "are you eating two meatballs at a time, the other said, no I am not. Your blind friend left already. The blind said " I thought you did the same thing because I am doing the same thing.
So are you pedophile? By the way how old is Banana? Then you assume that others do the same? Are you close to Fanusi? (Apart from evolution)

The mudman got mad and started throwing mud in the sky. Unfortunately, all mud came back on him. Oops.

Al rawandi Take it easy. Don't get that mad. Swearing and slandering will not prove anything but only this page turned out to be a sexually disoriented web page after you started dating web page? A bad example

Swearing holy prophets and Jesus is not a new thing but as I said and Zara said
The actions and words of those who do. by zara



Layla are you a pretender? How come you write so well while you are not a native spaker? any mutation, evolution?

109. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182499 by clearmind on May 20, 2008 at 9:10 am

(Says who, on what grounds?
Double standards won't do.)

Many prophets lived in different times and told the same truth. There is God and there is judgment day.

What about evolution?

On what grounds you prove it? Who proved it?

110. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182498 by clearmind on May 20, 2008 at 9:07 am

(don't understand how clearmind can write this,

"Simply claiming ... won't do either. First, you'd need to supply evidence that this was the case,"

and then write this with a straight face.)



Oh man this is getting funnier. Latso you wrote something and your guys think that I wrote it. Please surrender to the authorities.

111. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182495 by clearmind on May 20, 2008 at 9:04 am

Oh man it is gonna be a long day.

Neuro

Since you clearly don't know what you're talking about, I'm going to use an ad hominem [abusive] argument, just for my own fun. Then, I will briefly set forth a hypothesis. This hypothesis will not satisfy you, but if you were really a curious person, you would research it further.

1) Please use correct grammar.
The use of 'was' denotes sense of pastness/time.
The use of 'were' denotes situations hypothetical or contrary to fact and wishes or desires

81. Comment #181724 by latsot on May 18, 2008 at 4:23 am

ANOTHER HINT: simply claiming that society's laws are derived from religion won't do either. First, you'd need to supply evidence that this was the case and second you'd need to explain why more-or-less universal taboos against things like murder and theft pre-date formal systems of law.

Latsot, be careful there's a grammar police, but he is rookie. So he got the wrong guy.

Way to go Neuro. Way to go!

112. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #182293 by clearmind on May 19, 2008 at 3:42 pm

To al gone

first cool down. Do not continue to describe yourself with the bad words.
second,
Look chap, you are sitting in your armchair with all banana and you are trying to comment on the issues like palentines' struggle with watching only news and acting like you know it all while a little palestine girl was shot to death on the way to school or another innocent jewsih boy is dead because of suicide bombing. Do not commnet on people who are suffering on both sides just to feed your argument Ego.

How is the language of TRUTH?

113. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182291 by clearmind on May 19, 2008 at 3:32 pm

Diacanue

At least I am smarter than the guys on this web page, who are supporting evolution. BECAUSE I CAN THINK.

By the way what are the chances to write a comment for you without insulting and swearing?

At what age did you start swearing?

114. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182288 by clearmind on May 19, 2008 at 3:27 pm

To alrawandi

While you are saying ignore him, you are not ignoring? So what is your problem? At least you can do better things like writing articles and having interviews weekly to save evolution.

God, after awhile we will have another jungle, a jungle of artcles and interviews which is surely unclear to serve what?

It is not like that if I write more then i prove more that evolution is true.

Mr Dawkins, i realy wonder, what are you trying to prove?

115. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182285 by clearmind on May 19, 2008 at 3:21 pm

ANOTHER HINT: simply claiming that society's laws are derived from religion won't do either. First, you'd need to supply evidence that this was the case and second you'd need to explain why more-or-less universal taboos against things like murder and theft pre-date formal systems of law.


The laws of society did not rain from the sky or mutated or evolved. God created us and taught us through his prophets and the books how to live in the world;

The physical laws of the world enable us to live safely - like gravity that we obey it and we do not jump off the building and we obey the divine laws like do not lie, kill. do adultery, be homesexual, massasre, and on.

These laws started with the first prophet Adam and passed on to other prophets.

116. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #182130 by clearmind on May 19, 2008 at 8:59 am

manic-depressive on

(would truly like to know what exactly you argue. Could you please clarify, since your name suggests that you are more ague than us a-theist few?)

Sure. I started my debate with how logical evolution theory is. Logic draws the physical possibilities of any happenings. Beyond logic, God's act starts.

Now if you tell me, there was a chemical particles rain from the planets and then there you go a small pond existed. Then amino acids came to happen (in right order) or happened to exist by unexplainable luck and chances, and then, Dna popped up again all by itself and chance in the right order and code, there you go a sweet cute water worm turned up out of LUCK AND CHANCES, then we all came from a little worm. Logic will stop this comedy right away; nothing can happen by itself and without a design.

If you still don't get it, you can ask Mr dawkins.


To Phil rimmer
so I must assume from your unwillingness that your answer is YES

Assumptions became a trait of evolution;
You assume that there were planets
You assume that there were chemicals rains
You assume that chemicals made the amino acids
You assume that amino acids made DNA
You assume that DNA CREATED WORM
You assume that WORM BECAME our ancestor

This is really funny. An idea full of assumptions. If one assumption is wrong, evolution is gone forever, which was gone already.

to dingodave
("Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.")

A few quotations from me:
Feelings are not supposed to be logical. Dangerous is the man who has rationalized his emotions.
When dealing with people(evolins), remember you are not dealing with creatures of logic, but with creatures of emotion, creatures bristling with prejudice, and motivated by pride and vanity"

(Earthly masters as they would God, (Slaves, be obedient to those who are your earthly masters, with fear and trembling,)

Being a slave of my vanity, pride, prejudice assumptions, contradictions and delusions is the worst slavery.

Second we obey God not because we fear but to be grateful and thankful for creating us. The one who loves obeys whom he loves. Fear is for non-believers or atheists. For a believer, there is no fear.

(Religious people with sick mind are able to do anything since they are doing God's work and will be rewarded on Judgment day.
As my daughter says "Like same!")

People are not assigned to be prosecutor of God or carrying out God's Punishment. A true believer can't be a murderer and a murderer can't be a true believer.

If Hitler were an atheist, then, we will assume all atheists are Hitler, Is it fair? Nope.
I donna wanna say "Ignorance and prejudice is always getting in the way." So I do not say it.

117. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #182084 by clearmind on May 19, 2008 at 7:50 am

Al-gone with the evolution pops up:(Clearmind is wooter. Just ignore his pathetic ass.)

clearmind says
pathetic:miserably or contemptibly inadequate

if one guy writes three books a year, almost have three interviews, write three articles a week and his supporters do not allow any logical and scientific argument and expels the logic and logical guys by swearing and insulting, can ve call this guy Dawkins and his chaps?

Who fits in the defination of pathetic.

If I believe that i am right i would not write books again and again to try to prove that my idea is correct. Self-absorbed people can never make it. Truth is self evident so is creation while evolution needs a lot of pillars to lean on and without central pillar, logic, it is imposible to stand up.

Insulting is another pillar to defend evolution
I saw a many people by sharing their ideas, but facing swearing and insulting, they just quit. This is irritating

118. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #181926 by clearmind on May 18, 2008 at 8:08 pm

To Tony
I don't know the rule. The biggest rule in language is to write what you mean, in order for it to be understood with the least margin for error.

Okay let's paraphrase it for the sake of SEMANTICS.

Bad words belong to the the mouth that pops up.

Example, IF I said you are STUPID, then, i will calling myself indeed. But i never call or insult anybody on my comments. This is an attitude of believer.

Now let's see:

Tony : (You are a credibility-free and clarity-free propounder of immature nonsense.

Clearmind, your mind is as clear as, though more potent than, a chili-fed baby's formerly empty diaper.)

Nice to meet you. I am clearmind.

119. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #181924 by clearmind on May 18, 2008 at 7:56 pm

Phil said (Sick minded religites however feel that they can act as judge and jury, knowing as they do, the true mind of god. The punishments they inflict upon "possessed" children, for instance, are perhaps the purest form of evil I know.


Now he asks, (Oh and where did the quotes around "possessed" go? Don't tell me child possession is a possibility!....Is it?)

Now what?

I would not discuss something metaphysical with someone who is blinded by only physical things. It would be asking a blind man to watch a movie together.

120. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #181692 by clearmind on May 18, 2008 at 12:49 am

Diacanu says:
(If you need fear to make you be good, then you're not really a good person.)

Clearmind clears again;
I need to be good not because I fear only but also I follow God's orders and laws.
A good person means not to lie, not to twist, not to distort, not to smear not to swear when they lose, not to insult and finally not to cheat. So do the evolins fit in or believers fit in? Starting with you Diacanue, how many visitors did you turn off this web page by your swearing?

Phil rimmer says:

(All the police and judges will be pissed off that sick minded atheists have no fear of them.) Sick minded religites however feel that they can act as judge and jury, knowing as they do, the true mind of god. The punishments they inflict upon "possessed" children, for instance, are perhaps the purest form of evil I know.)

No need police. LOGIC POLIS IS ON THE CASE.
Punishment of possessed children or other wrong applications of some people who claim they act on behalf of God or holy books, will not bring any harm to the truth of God. Personalities and religion are different. If some believers misinterpret religion, this is their problem and they will face the God's judgment in hereafter. So you're saying is like you saw Dawkins working on a worm and trying to find out the DNA codes of all animals in it DOES NOT PROVE THAT EVOLUTION IS REPRESENTED BY DAWKINS. ONLY.

Is that clear?



Clearmind clears again.
gcujimmysays
(And strangely,to you, all the non believers I know manage to behave in a decent and moral manner)

Regarding decent and moral manners, you can read the comments of diacanue, al rawandi, and my old chap reverend, then, you see how they have good manners(!); I donna quote their comments here. See yourself.




Robotaholic DREAMS:

(the atheist always wins which cheers me up and I also get to see the bible/koran thumper get demolished- so it's a PLUS PLUS!)
Clearmind clears:

I love it when the evolins delude that evolution is fact and defeats bible or Qur'an or believers. Funny enough, I always felt the otherwise. Indeed if you say anyone that we all came from a water worm, the guy will ask us, "Are you all right?"

Mindless , fruitless efforts along with delusions, and dreams contribute a lot to the fact that evolution is still in the little pond giving it a head start or a huge credit how little pond existed with chemicals in it?

Sweet dreams! I donna wanna say sleep tight and don't let the bedbugs bite because I wouldn't help it to ask where is the bedbugs' spot in evolution tree or why did they exist since they are easy to disappear â€" natural paparazzi.

121. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #181625 by clearmind on May 17, 2008 at 5:25 pm

(You are an idiot. Keep preaching it, brother. Theism surely regrets your allegiance.)

Bad words again. You know the rule. As for preaching, compare to Mr dawkins' fruitless and numberless interviews, articles, BOOKS, I WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE PREACHING.

As for Hitler, He was certainly not a NORMAL GUY, with his obsessed mind and fascits acts. As an abnormal guy, he did not commit right things.

Atheist people with sick mind are able to do anything since they have no fear of God and Judgement day.

Thanks God, dawkins is only writing books and having interviews ONLY, THOUGH HE IS TRYING TO KILL LOGIC IN EVOLUTION THEORY, whic is a crime as well in terms of hiding the TRUTH.

122. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #181501 by clearmind on May 17, 2008 at 10:08 am

Ah Ben stein! Did you see what you did to evolution? Poor dawkins if he could do he would have written 10 articles a day and 5 interviews a week just to wipe out bad defeat in stein's movie? WE are now goint to another evolution jungle, but not about tree, it is about a jungle of articles and interviews.

Logic says; I am smarter than evolution, and evolution says i am defetaed in a battle against logic.

If I were Dawkins, I would buy a farm and make a little pond, get some worms, wait for the evolution to happen again. At least, i would not be so stressed out to prove evolution is a fact by walking and talking around newpapapers or pushing tv channels

123. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #181500 by clearmind on May 17, 2008 at 10:03 am

(Riandouglas pops up: For future reference, it's the little button labeled "delete" or "del", near all the other little buttons you hit with what would appear to be your forehead.
Hope that helps)

How do you know that? Any experience? Hold on what is your written on your forehead? Oh my god? Why did you write something like that on your forehead: Npo intelligence allowed.

Ah Ben stein! Did you see what you did to evolution? Poor dawkins if he could do he would have written 10 articles a day and 5 interviews a week just to wipe out bad defeat in stein's movie? WE are now goint to another evolution jungle, but not about tree, it is about a jungle of articles and interviews.

124. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #181494 by clearmind on May 17, 2008 at 9:53 am

(Islam teaches beheading, Christianity and Atheism do not. This is a specialty of Islam, and there is no denying such a thing.)

I have been reading Islam and Qur'an lately, and I I could not find any verse in Qur'an beheading infidels or killing innocent people carrying a bomb?

But i read this about the prophet Muhammed's life; Once one of the prophet's companion killed a non-believer , in a war - but the non-believer just said he believed in God but the companion still killed him because he thought he said it because he was afraid. And when he told this to prophet Mohammed, the prophet stood up and said 'did you look into his heart' with an angry voice three times. He meant that 'how do you know that?'

The prophet mohammed's life is full of merciful anecdotes and facts like that. Even once he changed his way of his army because of the an ant hole on the way? His life is very similar to jesus Christ in terms of mercy and understanding.

Christianity or Islam have never been presented in its real grounds after Jesus and Prophet Mohammed. Your judgement is based on your newpaper news not the reality.

Athiests do not behead but they do censorship, right? Trying to behead the ideas? Or being a clown in terms of worm stories and when the LOGIC STAND UP FOR IT, there you go, cencorship steps in, with a so-called valid excuses, different name usage? We really don't buy it. what was the expression again, i remember; no intelligence allowed.

125. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #180721 by clearmind on May 15, 2008 at 3:48 pm

Today's pop quiz question: What language is this?:

zxcv/nmm,.///yuiopqwert! Thus yhnujm/> bgtrfv%//qazxsw?

Well, a;kdfuo992myo, but generally ,couahthiwy78gowng. So, yes.

avmnr03934g you buddy!

A. Human's language
B. Evolins language

You got it. This is evolins' language. The language popped up when DARWIN and RUSSELL trying to figure out the evolution tree and once they started swearing at each other, they created this language. As a sweet memory to their contribution, evolins use it now and then.

Thank you Darwin and Russell.

What About Dawkins? Any memorial thing about him? Sure very soon! We will reveal the language about him.

126. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #180408 by clearmind on May 14, 2008 at 8:12 pm

To fanusi in his fanus only


Mr dawkins is a very nice guy and he is very kind and he is a very caring person.
But Dawkins is a dummy walking around talking around interviewing around trying to prove that we came from a little water worm.

Now I delete the first paragraph

Dawkins is a dummy walking around talking around interviewing around trying to prove that we came from a little water worm.

Does it ring the bell?

I has been reading entire Qur'an and the prophet Mohemmed's teachings and his life last couple of days and then I found that FANUSI is absolutely TWISTING THE TRUTH.


(Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you)

Like DAVID, the prophet Mohammed has defended himself and his people when they were attacked.

Second before Mohammed started the war, he certainly ordered his soldiers NOT TO KILL

CHILDREN WOMEN, ANIMALS, THE PEOPLE IN ANY RELIGION PRAYING IN THEIR TEMPLE, AND TORCH THE HARVEST OR HOUSES.


(The Qur'an also allows for child-rape.
Well? What's your answer to that?}

This is the biggest lie and smear I have ever heard. Give me what verse in Qur'an or Bible says that? ARE You are talking about yourself. You know the story of two blind men in my previous comments? Or talking about American soldiers raping Iraqian girls and burning them alive?


Fanusi get out of your fanus and tell the truth who are you? What are you? GENIE? And why are you smearing on religions? Does SMEARING MAKE EVOLUTION TRUE OR MAKE YOU LOOK FANUSI?

127. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #180403 by clearmind on May 14, 2008 at 7:57 pm

Mr dawkins is a very nice guy and he is very kind and he is a very caring person.
But Dawkins is a dummy walking around talking around interviewing around trying to prove that we came from a little water worm.

Now I delete the first paragraph

Dawkins is a dummy walking around talking around interviewing around trying to prove that we came from a little water worm.

Does it ring the bell?

I haeb neen reading entire Qur'an and the prophet Mohmmed's teachingn and his life last couple of days and then i found that FANUSI is absolutely


(Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you)

128. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #178019 by clearmind on May 10, 2008 at 9:05 am

(Or how they are traditionally interpreted? Or the long history of jihadist expansion? Do you know anything about this subject at all?)


What about the British expansion in Africa, exploiting gold mines and diamonds?


Okay let's clear the way out of false ideas and smearing;

1, Respect prophets and people's beliefs is a necessity of being Human being. You cannot make cartoon of Jesus or Moses Or Prophet Mohammed just because you want to improve that there is a freedom of speech. Our freedom starts within us and ends where other people' s boundaries start.

2. Raping, killing, massacres, oppression, exploitation, and other bad deeds has nothing to do with any religion teachings. Our desires, personality, ambitions, and weaknesses are always getting in the way and when we lose the battle, we start justifying ourselves to cover our bad deeds and make them look good deeds. Religion is the truth and if anyone looks into it carefully he will find the right way. Okay Let's go to Iraq for peace (not for oil)

3. If Lord Winston says there is no evolution two years now, then what? Is he the criteria or any standing point that you can stand on it? Evolution is a delusion and not only one dozen of lord Winston will not change it. Seeker of truth has got many scientists as well to prove otherwise, so what? Truth is still there.


4. Reverend, The skeleton is a real one and God's creation does not need any hoax as evolution needed as you will see in the following web pages. No wonder the big skeleton is a big knock out to evolution whether you accept it or not.

Evolution is a big hoax.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evolution Hoax/evolution_the_big_hoax.htm

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evolution Hoax/4000.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy3-iSgGyz4

http://www.evolutionhoax.com/

The list goes on and on.

I donna wan say laughing boy because bad words belong to the owner.

5. Again if I have a dog and I call him Dawkins, which I would not because I respect each human being as an art of God. it would not be nice. So we have be understanding about other people's feelings and religious choice. And mr dawkings is still pissed off at Ben Stein because his pride is hurt. What about people's feelings?

129. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #177881 by clearmind on May 9, 2008 at 10:00 pm

(And what does Western foreign policy have to do with the suppression of women, slavery, and child-rape that is central to Islam?)

In India british soldiers once cut the 50 thousand fabric weavers hands of indian people. Is it barbaric or civilized?


If you judge any divine religion without reading it whole, what you say is only twisting, distorting, spreading and smearing which fits in evolution theory very much.

130. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #176894 by clearmind on May 8, 2008 at 9:21 am

Earth to Sam Harris. Earth calling Sam Harris. Answer, please. I, lastgreekstanding, have some astonishing news for you.

IT'S NOT ISLAM, STUPID! Nor real Christianity!

It's " us"---the West. We who have imposed corrupt, brutal regimes in the Middle East; overthrown their democracies; assassinated their moderate and nationalist leaders, waged relentless wars against them.)

There is more, Mr harris, British empire sucked the blood of African countries, killing innocent people, raping, exploting and more ugly things that nobody wants to remember (Watch black diamond)

Religion is a guide to people. Some of them use it to find the right path and some of them use it wrongly and end in misery. Now if one says entire English people are bloodthirsty because of explotion and masaccare in Africa, It would not be fair since most of the English people have nothing to do with it.

If you wanna spread something on religion to prove that evolution is right, this is the funniest way; to attack on some wrong religious practices as a proof with the approach " you see religion is bad so it is not true, then there is no God and that is why evolution is fact."



All for what? All for the control of THEIR fuckin' oil, that's what.
AND DAIMONDS AND GOLD IN AFRICA

Second argument; The big skeleton found in Arabia is a big strike to evolution. The commnets that say otherwise is just to make you feel self-assured. No body could would fabricate bones to prove God's creation, since God's creation does not need to do that as evolution needs to prove it so badly.

Does it ring the bell?

It is very entertaining to see all of you trading jokes and humor to pretend that you are okay while deep inside you are boiling against the Big skeleton proof.

Truth hurts.

131. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #176609 by clearmind on May 7, 2008 at 7:04 pm

Defending the truth

The following web pages show us clearly how tall the first human being was. Of course, atheists jumped on their seats when they saw it first and right away trying to save their neck of evolution, started screaming, hoax, definetely hoax, it is impossible. We are not deluded. It can't be.

What can i say?
Truth always HURTS.


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/anunnaki/anu_11.htm

http://www.mechodownload.com/forum/fun-corner/45600-12-meter-skeleton-person.html

132. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #176608 by clearmind on May 7, 2008 at 7:02 pm

CATCH OF THE DAY: al rawandi says: Oh no! Did I offend you? Well try this... pull your lip over your head and swallow.


Irate: There is a possiblility. Given that both are cunts, it is not impossible. Get a life.

Hmm. Let me think. I am 1.87 so in this case, tables turned. How tall are you irate in terms of evolution?

And I have got a very nice surprise for you but not on this thread? Let's see how tall the first human being as it was stated in Bible?

133. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #176412 by clearmind on May 7, 2008 at 9:17 am

Truth said: Farewell to all.

Truth cannot take a place in a web page where vulture culture like attitudes hiding behind lies and delusions. Truth is above the manners of exchanging humor,swearing, teasing, and belittling.

Expression is getting in the way again;

NO INTELLIGENCE ALLOWED.

You guys really need to improve your attitudes. The way you act is sinking the evolution faster in the storm of Science and Logic. One guy seeker of Truth dealt with you very nicely without having bad manners. Irate and Al rawandi, why don't you play outside on the beach beaching each other rather than being nasty here.

revered, give up. I told you. You can't fight it anymore?

One million dollar question;

Is there possibility that seeker can be wooter?

134. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #174595 by clearmind on May 2, 2008 at 10:02 pm

Monalisa: Any chance? Any colours mixed up by itself and made the painting?

Colorious: Not yet. be patient!

Monalisa: Way beyon patience. You have been waiting almost for 14.6 billion years. Give it up man, you make yourself look silly while you still wait in front of the colours and ASSUME THAT SOME DAY, they will come together by themselves.

Colorious: I can't. I can't lose my face.It;s gotta be that way because I assume that way.
Monalisa: Then you are going to lose your mind?


Seeking the truth is not away for this web page. But Seeker of truth's attempts are quite appreciated. And I need a very good proof about human history, and relatively earth's age. Be patient.

Reverend, how are you doing? So much into discussion ha? Take it easy pal, Your heathy comes first. I still pray for you.

135. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #174030 by clearmind on May 1, 2008 at 12:52 pm

(Quetzalcoatl
Anna-

Evolin= person who believes in evolution, apparently. )

(riandouglas Found it. Apparently "Evolin" is a fetish pornstar)

No comment!

136. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #173682 by clearmind on May 1, 2008 at 5:53 am

Quetzalcoatl
Anna-

Evolin= person who believes in evolution, apparently.

Thanks pal.

Evolins is the word i figured out. No offense.

137. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #173681 by clearmind on May 1, 2008 at 5:51 am

rEVEREND

You know the story of two blind men; one blind assumes that the other guy is blind too like himself and he assumes again that the other blind does the same thing he does.

reverend assumes: I was hoping that he would either learn to post without wetting himself,

138. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #173676 by clearmind on May 1, 2008 at 5:45 am

Corolouis: (Tell me wooter, what is it like, being so inept and so fulminatingly palsied in your posting that your output is a source of schadenfreude mirth for my tropical fish? Are you completely bereft of an ASPM gene? I think that we should be told.)

Monalisa: Any hope? Any formulation?

Calilasseia= colorious: Are you being sarcastic? I told you I am still waiting
Monalisa: But it was five days ago.

Calilasseia= colorious: You have no idea how long evolution takes right?

Monalisa: yoiu are the one who can tell. Now you are in a lab like situation and you are waiting. You will tell us.

Calilasseia= colorious: Okay, now colours are having experiment - trial and error- you know when they got the first strike and drawing they will start evolving.

Monalisa: Who is going to hold the Brush?

Calilasseia= colorious: Blindwatchmaker?
Monalisa: Is he BLIND?

Calilasseia= colorious:He is not a human. IT is UNCONSCIOUS chances and luck.

Monalisa: (I guess he is losing it.) Okay just wait and see

139. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #173628 by clearmind on May 1, 2008 at 2:04 am

Monalisa: How is it goin'?
Calilasseia= colorious:Still waiting!

140. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #173627 by clearmind on May 1, 2008 at 2:02 am

Evolins attack(!)

Incredulous (He's joking right? Clearmind teaching? Surely not!)
No worries. You are not on my list.

Gobanana: (Look guys! Clearmind learned how to copy and paste!)

And you learned how to DATE! Best and only thing you can. Good for you.

Tezcatlipoca: Is a Clearmind Clears the same as a Gish Gallop?
Are you fishing around or gishing and galloping around?


Cartomancer: (Can someone with a better grasp of Wooterish furnish me with a translation please? Much obliged..).

(IQ level is needed. Please furnish it first.)

Colorious: (Heh, wooter has demonstrated that he would be incapable of understanding the first sentence of my rebuttal, let alone the detailed content, if he's the one claiming that radiometric dating is wrong.)

Yeah. I could not sleep last night just because I could not understand you. Oh man, so pathetic that one guy claims that he can't be understood. Let's see: What goes around comes around.
Logic is like a boomerang for funny ideas and funny people; whenever they throw it away to get rid of, it will surely come back. Take it easy pal, JUST WAIT AND SEE.


Dr Benway; (Please give. The streets and the internets are no place for a wooter)

Yeah, No intelligence allowed. We know it.

REVEREND: (I am going to stand up for Wooter)
Now dawkins web page has got another name: Dating web page(not radiometric dating) and it will be having another one, swearing and dirty web page. Congr. Rev. Prove more. The world is reading about evolins' arguments(!)


For real scientists! Dating issues.
http://www.trueauthority.com/cvse/radiometric.htm

141. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #173626 by clearmind on May 1, 2008 at 1:59 am

First of all, once the first chemical building blocks of life had been formed from non-life precursor molecules (a process which has been repeated experimentally in the laboratory numerous times), the process by which thos molecules gradually assembled into more and more complex molecules is the process of chemical reaction.

Monalisa: Thank God, Russell is taken away by his Logic police. He is really crazy. Now what? Who is this guy? Hello who are you?

Calilasseia= colorious: None of your business.
Monalisa: Take it easy. I am just curious. What are you gonna do with those colours?
Calilasseia= colorious: There will be a painting. I am just gonna put all the colours and then colours will be formed through experiments and then be assembled by all itself.
Monalisa: Excuse me?
Calilasseia= colorious: What? You don't believe it right? Chemical reaction, experiments, process, randomness, formation, assembling them my painting will happen.
Monalisa: Hmm interesting. Are you a relative of Russell?
Calilasseia= colorious: Don't ask me questions. I have to observe.
Monalisa: But nothing happens by itself. Everything that is designed needs a conscious designer. Look at me. Da Vinci made me. I did not come out by myself.
Calilasseia= colorious: This is science and I am scientist? You can't get it because it is soooo complex.
Monalisa: Tell me about it. So how long do you think it will take that your painting will happen?
Calilasseia= colorious: Sihhht. No noise. Wait and see with me?

Mona Lisa: (He is really out of his mind. Any way I am all bored here. Need to kill the time. God, look at the guy? He is damn serious. He is looking at the painting so faithfully? Let me watch the following videos. Learn more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MAe9FmRUsY

142. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #173093 by clearmind on April 30, 2008 at 10:30 am

Tyler: So, what's the name of your god?

TRUTH


Colorious: I see wooter is back with his inimitable brand of excremental garbage.
Clearmind clears: Now this guy turned into a wikipedia that label's God's creation as Evolution. BEWARE(!)


Last comment from silkworm:

Mr Colorious, what makes you think that I came from the water worm? What makes you think that amino acids cameall together by chance? How come I eat leaves and produce silk and humans use it? How do you explain the perfect connection and cooperation between creatures?

A: Luck, chance, blindwatchmaker, menotthinking o
B. God created them.

And do not let clearmind answer you seriously, you will be another wikipedia info. That is for sure under the title of Evolution wreckage.

143. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #173092 by clearmind on April 30, 2008 at 10:28 am

How evolins prove that evolution is true(!)

Gobanana: Yay for Queen! Quetz...more evidence that you have good taste in music! I thought that the creationists/ID proponents had given up on that argument? but yet he still ignored me. Errr...what? How/why would we look desperate if you were to leave? I'm pretty sure no one will be sad to see you go.

Clearmind clears: Actually we already started to dig up the graveyard for evolution theory. Can you feel that?


Quetz: Do I have to kick some demon ass?


DARKNOLIGHTEN: Wooter managed to get an H in blind watcmaker at last.
Progress.


Al rawandi: Or you could choose to date wooter, if you are a self hating atheist.
Anna and I have incompatible styles.(We see that)

She's short, Im tall
-She's on the East Coast, Me on the West Coast
-She is a Liberal, I am an escaped Nazi
-She is a biologist, I am an out of work lounge singer
But we both love beer!

Frankus1122 ;Looks like RD.net is fast becoming the hottest dating site on the internet!(What else they can do?)


Quetzalcoatl: I'll break it down:
Earth: Old or young?
Evolution: Happened/didn't?
Designer: Yes/no?
If yes: Christian God/Aliens/Huitzilopochtli/Other?

Clearmind clears: Earth is old enough to display God' creation.
Evolution CANNOT/COULD NOT HAPPEN BECAUSE evolution is an idea that is based unconscious circumstances, chances, luck, being unexplained randomness that are ASSIMED TO DESIGN conscious creatures at the end.
Designer designs and designed eyes and mind look and see that there is a designer. But some look at it but can't see it and they still keep looking for amino acids in the little pond.

Murray: Nice example of a `loaded question' . So when are you going to stop kicking your dog ?



Cartomancer CARTOONS: "Find love while arguing with Wooter",
Bored now. Can we have someone with something interesting to discuss instead? Or how about another game of Mornington Crescent, or some more baking recipes?
Clearmind clears: Hmm, I do not think that they can find love while arguing with me. But surely they can find LOGIC.

Clearmind clears: You can date someone since you can't find any argument against LOGIC. Since this web page turned into a dating web page.

Quetzalcoatl IS ON; Because it's hard to debate someone who thinks the answer to most questions is GODDIDIT!



Clearmindclears: No chances didit. Come on you are breaking blind blindwatcmaker's heart

RIANDOUGLAS: Do not piss off Calilasseaia.

Please rian just tell lasagna that we did not mean for it to happen. We are all shattered. Promise we will not make him angry anymore.


Dawkins is Schizophrenic?

Incredulous: Thanks for delivering this excellent response. I fear it is wasted on Wooter, though reading it is a very profitable use of my time.

Clearmind clear; Tell me about it. His comments became a homework assignment for my students:

Find out the illogical points that is put forward in the comment in terms of LOGIC. No worries when the results are out, you will see that.

Tyler: Tyler: (An oxymoron if I ever read one!)





epeeist: think this is where he needs to be pressed. We have provided links to a variety of evidence. As yet he has provided nothing at all. He needs to be pressed to provide references to empirical data.

Clearmind clears: YEP WE ALL READ THEM ABOVE.

144. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #172771 by clearmind on April 30, 2008 at 4:35 am

Calilasseia

I AM SOOOO MUCH OVERWHELMED and IMPRESSED THAT after I read your reply I became speechless. Man? What am I gonna do now?

I know I will ask Mona Lisa's help again. Oh Man Mona Lisa is really tired of trying to keep Russell away from her, who is constantly looking for Da Vinci in her painting. Now colourisa joined him too.

145. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #172763 by clearmind on April 30, 2008 at 4:26 am

(Miller/Urey experiments on amino acids)

Let's see what the truth is
The Millerâ€"Urey experiments involved filling a sealed glass apparatus with the gases that Oparin had speculated were necessary to form lifeâ€"namely methane, ammonia and hydrogen (to mimic the conditions that they thought were in the early atmosphere) and water vapour (to simulate the ocean). Next, while a heating coil kept the water boiling, they struck the gases in the flask with a high-voltage (60,000 volts) tungsten spark-discharge device to simulate lightning. Below this was a water-cooled condenser that cooled and condensed the mixture, allowing it to fall into a water trap below.23

Within a few days, the water and gas mix produced a pink stain on the sides of the flask trap. As the experiment progressed and the chemical products accumulated, the stain turned deep red, then turbid.24 After a week, the researchers analyzed the substances in the U-shaped water trap used to collect the reaction products.25 The primary substances in the gaseous phase were carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen (N2).21 The dominant solid material was an insoluble toxic carcinogenic mixture called 'tar' or 'resin', a common product in organic reactions, including burning tobacco. This tar was analyzed by the latest available chromatographic techniques, showing that a number of substances had been produced. No amino acids were detected during this first attempt, so Miller modified the experiment and tried again.20,26

In time, trace amounts of several of the simplest biologically useful amino acids were formedâ€"mostly glycine and alanine.20 The yield of glycine was a mere 1.05%, of alanine only 0.75% and the next most common amino acid produced amounted to only 0.026% of the totalâ€"so small as to be largely insignificant. In Miller's words, 'The total yield was small for the energy expended.'27 The side group for glycine is a lone hydrogen and for alanine, a simple methyl (â€"CH3) group. After hundreds of replications and modifications using techniques similar to those employed in the original Millerâ€"Urey experiments, scientists were able to produce ONLY SMALL AMOUNTS OF LESS THAN HALF OF THE 20 AMINO ACIDS REQUIRED FOR LIFE. The rest require much more complex synthesis conditions.

Miller 2
Miller's research has, for the reasons discussed above, helped us to better understand why life could not have emerged naturally. In a summary of the famous Millerâ€"Urey origin-of-life experiment, Horgan concluded that Miller's results at first seemed to
'… provide stunning evidence that life could arise from what the British chemist J.B.S. Haldane had called the "primordial soup." Pundits speculated that scientists, like Mary Shelley's Dr. Frankenstein, would shortly conjure up living organisms in their laboratories and thereby demonstrate in detail how genesis unfolded. It hasn't worked out that way. In fact, almost 40 years after his original experiment, Miller told me that solving the riddle of the origin of life had turned out to be more difficult than he or anyone else had envisioned.'48
MILLER EVEN WAS A CONSCIOUS GUY WHO PREPARED ALL THE CONDITIONS BUT YET FAILED TO MAKE IT HAPPEN, THOUGH, HE FAKED WITH THE SCREAM 'EURAKA'

Quoted from http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v18/i2/abiogenesis.asp

MILLER EVEN WAS A CONSCIOUS GUY WHO PREPARED ALL THE CONDITIONS BUT YET FAILED TO MAKE IT HAPPEN, THOUGH, HE FAKED WITH THE SCREAM 'EURAKA' LATER CONFESSED HIS FAILURE AND FAKING.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=TCWM3TqwcBw&feature=related

146. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #172762 by clearmind on April 30, 2008 at 4:23 am

Let's see what we have today in delusional evolution;

REVEREND:(You cannot have my mother's phone number.)

I wish I could. You are always using bad words. I was planning to complain about you to your mother.

Seriously, I am happy that your parents are still with you. Mine passed away.

Reverend says silkworms do not make silk.
(Silkworms (Bombyx Mori) don't actually produce silk 'the most expensive fabric on the earth'. Silkworms produce a coccoon to protect and insulate their chrysalis stage during metamorphosis. It was humans, some 4,600 years ago that started using this material to create cloth)

Primary school students even know that silkworm make the silk. Are u all right reverend?
http://www.coolquiz.com/trivia/explain/docs/silk.asp

Reverend bubbles up: The silkworm now exists through unnatural selection;

Natural selection:?

And

Unnatural selection:?



IS INTELLIGENCE A THREAT TO EVOLUTION?

Inconsistence is a THREAT TO EVOLUTION?

147. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #171988 by clearmind on April 29, 2008 at 4:22 am

(No, I don't believe in Yahweh due to it's contradictory nature and the contradictions in the books supposedly inspired by it.)

1. Contradictions are in the way people think and interpret not in the creation of God and in the truth.
2. I respect all holy divine religions and their prophets since they were sent to deliver the truth.
3. But conflictions and assumptions and chain of assumptions are totally full of in evolution. One assumption follows another and another assumption follows another. Since the first assumption is totally illogical, then, there is a break in the evolution.


sane1
(oh no - clearmind has been here too. Of all the IDiot silliness that has been found on this site, clearmind's is surely the most IDiotic, as much for its inarticulate expression, as for its plain uninformed stupidity.)

You are here too. You know what? What stupidity mean is that millions of creatures with different structures just came from a worm that happened by luck and chances through amino acids that came out by chance again by getting in right(!)order by unexplained randomness and blind watchmaker and again amino acids dropped down by chemical rains from planets which we do not know how the planets came out. The story goes on like this and never ends.

So let's hear what Forest Gump says Stupid is as stupid does.

148. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #171953 by clearmind on April 29, 2008 at 3:19 am

Dear reverend,

Can I get your mother's phone number?

149. Interview with Dan Dennett

Comment #171047 by clearmind on April 28, 2008 at 9:13 am

Brian says :Evolution isn't chance, it's incremental selection of chance mutations.

Bravo. You are almost there.What about this?
You need a medicine and that medicine is ready and you asked the pharmacist whether the medicine is realiable or not?
The pharmacist said, he did not SELECT ANY SPECIFIC ingredients to make your medicine. By chances and luck, the correct ingredients with correct amounts came together on the floor and there it is, your medicine is out.

Selection mutation and FRUSTRATION.

As for silkworms, labeling how they make it is God's creation. I am asking how silkworms eat leaves and make silk and became a moth in a short time, surviving natural selection, getting lost in the evolution tree, So any other frustration?

150. Is religion a threat to rationality and science?

Comment #171033 by clearmind on April 28, 2008 at 8:57 am

Epeeist

Evolution has got another problem now. More important than blessed water. Silkworms? moth, and evolution do not match.