TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- This website is so ass-backwards it's funny
Pages (14): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 »
| quote: |
| Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 It's not ignorant. If you don't want to read it, then just don't read it. You easily have that option to you know. |
Look Nellie, this is the last time I'm going to post a response to you unless you are willing to debate the issue. I respect your beliefs, and being a theist myself, I understand the basic precepts of your beliefs. However, this forum is not about a simple adherence to faith or a regurigitation of what we believe in ... that can take place anywhere. This forum is about debate, the understanding of the arguments of your opponent, and responding to those arguments with credible sources or a cogent argument. You appear unwilling to even read over the arguments some of us are making much less provide critical analysis of the sources we provide to refute your statements/sources. You stated that you posted a link about macro-evolution and I READ your link, and I posted my analysis/response to that link. One would expect for you to respond and post a refutation of my argument but you have yet to do so with me, and pretty much most other arguments everybody else is making. Until you begin to committ to the effort of intellectually debating the issue, I won't give you the courtesy of spending my time to attempt to rationalize the argument with you.
Edit: Ok, I know you're 16, but would you mind me asking exactly where you are from and whether you go to a public or private school? No offense intended, but I'm always curious about these things. Don't worry, I never patronize on the basis of age ... only on the quality of the argument.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by PHALPAX I'm quite aware of your stance. The problem I find is that you continually use the same points over and over again and fall back on logic that was used in the middle ages. Your closed mindedness on this issue draws nothing but sourness and ignorance in my mind. And in that, I cannot say my opinion is high in the context of your wisdom and reason regarding this particular issue. But I guess your right; the freedom of speech also comes with freedom to listen. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider Look Nellie, this is the last time I'm going to post a response to you unless you are willing to debate the issue. I respect your beliefs, and being a theist myself, I understand the basic precepts of your beliefs. However, this forum is not about a simple adherence to faith or a regurigitation of what we believe in ... that can take place anywhere. This forum is about debate, the understanding of the arguments of your opponent, and responding to those arguments with credible sources or a cogent argument. You appear unwilling to even read over the arguments some of us are making much less provide critical analysis of the sources we provide to refute your statements/sources. You stated that you posted a link about macro-evolution and I READ your link, and I posted my analysis/response to that link. One would expect for you to respond and post a refutation of my argument but you have yet to do so with me, and pretty much most other arguments everybody else is making. Until you begin to committ to the effort of intellectually debating the issue, I won't give you the courtesy of spending my time to attempt to rationalize the argument with you. Edit: Ok, I know you're 16, but would you mind me asking exactly where you are from and whether you go to a public or private school? No offense intended, but I'm always curious about these things. Don't worry, I never patronize on the basis of age ... only on the quality of the argument. |
)
| quote: |
| Originally posted by arctic Please tell me you aren't serious. God's existence has never been proven, every argument for the existence of god contains a lame logical fallacy of some form or another. No doubt you will retort that you 'speak to Jesus' or something of the sort, it almost isn't worth discussing this with you, it's like talking to a brick wall. If there was indeed proof of god's existence, don't you think that it would be spread across the Internet/news services etc. rather quickly? If you showed me proof, actual, real proof, then yes, I would accept it. But sadly, no such proof exists, and if it did, what makes you so sure that a supreme being would turn out to be the Christian god. If it does turn out that the Christian god exists, then I'm pleased that I've 'refused to worship him', so to speak. As the bible clearly outlines, the Christian god has no morals or ethical standards. He condones mass killing, including that of over (40?) toddlers because they laughed at a bald man. Need I even mention the Noah's ark story, where god kills every human on earth, then decides that it wasn't such a good idea after all.  The list is endless, need I even mention 'the earth is flat' fiasco? i truly don't understand how somebody could believe in rubbish like creation. Do you deny the existence of Dinosaurs? (Assuming that you're a young Earth creationist). Try reading the stuff that MisterOpus1 posted, hopefully it might open your eyes.  |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 If this forum is about debating,Then why are there topics like this one? I don't call that fair at all. |
| quote: |
Atheists,agnostics,catholics,buddhists(sp?),muslims... I respect all their beliefs, but I also ask respect in return. |
| quote: |
I do know what a debate is. Yes, I'm 16. I'm an American. I'm in the good ol' state of Virginia. I'm homeschooled ( for many reasons. )And I'm glad to hear you don't judge a person by their age. ( Hard quality to find these days. :/) |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider Well in what seems to be the norm, topics may start off as humorous arguments representation one side of a view point. There is nothing wrong with that. If I post a thread dedicated to Michael Jakson's quirkiness and insinuating that he's a pedophile, am I making the case that he is a pedophile or that I'm unwilling to debate that issue intellectually? Obviously no. |
| quote: |
Ok, I believe that you know the argumentative spirit of debate. So debate with us rather than adopt a defensive mentality that leaves no room for argument. It doesn't matter what level you want to start on this debate, simply ask or argue away and respond to the responses rationally and intelligently. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider ... I think most respect out of respect, .... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 The fact of the matter is, opening a topic like this ISN'T showing respect. It's basically showing how much of an ass you(not you,just you in general if you know what I mean.) can be. It's not fair. Sure, open a topic about a debate, but don't open a topic to personally attack something. I do debate, the only time I get defensive is if people step out of line and start personally attacking. ( There's no room for that in a debate. ) |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MrSquirrel You MUST bve on the sauce tonight. That mad little sense my friend. MrS |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider ...If you do not have the credible sources or the argumentative facts to debate with him/address his statements than do not attempt to do so with baseless platitudes. |
)
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider It's hard to be coherent while drinking a 40 ... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MrSquirrel Is it Mickey's or Olde English? MrS |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DigiNut I think the problem is, and I mean this with as much respect as possible to theists, that people who grow up indoctrinated into a dogmatic religion honestly don't have the intellectual capacity to differentiate between baseless platitudes and cogent arguments. |
| quote: |
| It becomes almost axiomatic for them. Deviance from that belief is simply not an option, any more than it would be for us to say 2 + 2 = 5. The only difference is that what they believe in is debunked and full of contradictions, whereas mathematical and scientific axioms generally have stood up to rigorous testing. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DigiNut I think the problem is, and I mean this with as much respect as possible to theists, that people who grow up indoctrinated into a dogmatic religion honestly don't have the intellectual capacity to differentiate between baseless platitudes and cogent arguments. (Edit: I guess it really makes more sense to say that people who grow up with that dogmatic religion and manage to continue to accept it in the face of almost irrefutable contrary evidence, probably don't have that intellectual capacity... since many people do grow up indoctrinated but come to their senses later. )It becomes almost axiomatic for them. Deviance from that belief is simply not an option, any more than it would be for us to say 2 + 2 = 5. The only difference is that what they believe in is debunked and full of contradictions, whereas mathematical and scientific axioms generally have stood up to rigorous testing. I've come to the realization that Nelly doesn't even realize what she's doing. I don't think it's possible to argue logically with these people. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 Pat Roberston isn't a religious extremist. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 No,Of course we don't agree on that. The Bible should be taken literally,It's important. |
| quote: |
| Why would I read a link that is against the Bible? Of course they will make up something to criticize it. |
| quote: |
| That's not able to proove your point. If you are going to give me the verse,give me the link off an actual Bible webpage. |
| quote: |
| Adam sinned. That's why he and Eve were banished from the Garden. |
| quote: |
| God wasn't afraid.. |
| quote: |
The man has now become like one of us (notice the plural here), knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever. |
| quote: |
| and God was not walking around the garden. |
| quote: |
Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the lord god as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the lord god among the trees of the garden. |
| quote: |
| Further more,there is only ONE God. So now that-that's cleared up. |
| quote: |
The man has now become like one of us... |
| quote: |
| Evolution has many missing links, how could you take marcro evolution seriously? Because you can't. |
Nessa-
I'm afraid I'm going to take the same road as Occrider and consider this my last post to you in this particular thread. It may actually be the last time I debate with you altogether (and I use that word "debate" rather lightly), but that remains to be seen. My reasons are the following:
1. It is painfully obvious that you have refused to read any rebuttal material I or anyone else has posted. The fact that you continue posting the wrong title of a book that you have not read (and that I've thoroughly read and rebutted), i.e. "the case for faith" when it's actually called "The Case for Christ", clearly speaks volumes about your intellectual honesty.
2. You have very little skills at all in debating. You have willingly or unwillingly avoided specific points addressed to your creationist arguments, and have offered no supportive evidence in your counterpoints. The only counterargument you've made was a website that was already rebutted, and a book that you continued to misstate the title (and was clearly knocked down by myself and other critics that I've posted). You mention you have other sources, yet you fail to give those sources. This is very familiar with your arguments on Iraq's WMD and the reasons for war - you cited the similarities between this war and the Spanish War, yet you consistently refused to specify with your arguments. A pattern in your arguments is evident. In effect, this has made any arguments you've had very suspect. The idea behind a debate is to voice your opinion or stance on the matter and be able to support such opinions with solid evidence. So far you have shown none.
Normally it is immaterial to me personally how old you are or your education level, but I guarantee you that my 29 years of living with a couple of degrees in the Biological Sciences hold a little more weight than your home-schooled teaching comprehension on this particular subject. IOW, I'm sorry but you have consistently shown you do not understand evolution at all. Until you do show a slight understanding of the subject, I will no longer be addressing this issue with you. As I've said before, you also have the option of contacting me via PM if you so desire to discuss the issues further.
On a personal note, this somewhat pains me to see the lack of quality in education for home schoolers. My brother, who is also quite religious, has made the decision with his wife to home school his 3 kids (I think he has 20 more kids on the way too - those Southern Babtists love to multiply). While I do not doubt the intelligence level of he and his family, it pains me to see his religion interfere with his decision making ability on the science criterion he has chosen to teach his kids. To be able to allow matters of faith and the unobserved scuttle his judgement on matters of scientific fact and observation really pisses me off to no avail, but of course I would never tell him how to bring up his own kids.
I will tell you this, Nessa. If you choose to go to a public college (and I pray you do), you are in for quite a rude awakening in your biology courses. You will find that nothing in the biological sciences make sense whatsoever without knowing and understanding the fundamental concepts of evolution. It is something that you cannot fake merely to get by (unless you cheat, of course). You might be able to then understand that the biological science researchers use evolution as a premise for all understanding, because there is simply no other premise that makes more sense for their research.
This is the crux of the problem with creationism - it stands and falls on attempts to disprove evolution, but yet when asked of a mechanism of it's own for its own research, observation, and predictions of hypothesis, it has absolutely none at all. IOW, it has no POSITIVE evidence to support its assertions that Godditit. And to answer one of my own questions I posed to you a while back, this is the reason why there is not one creationist paper that is published in any peer-reviewed science journal. It has no evidence to support it, and this is what science is all about (as well as this debate). Trying to disprove another theory (evolution) does not give credence to it's own theory (creationism). Creationism needs positive evidence to support itself. Until this occurs, nothing published outside of religious propaganda materials and websites will occur.
Something tells me, however, that a public university is not in your future, or shall I dare say, in the future your parents and/or church require you to follow.
In closing, I shall reiterate that I will no longer address anything more to you in regards to this subject of evolution until you've shown a clear willingness to both read the material I and others have posted as well as give insightful rebuttals to such materials.
-----------------------------------
Now I'm going to ask you something off the topic of evolution, so I hope you will respond. Since there's a little stearing of the topic towards atheism, I'd like to ask you the following:
What is the Council of Nicaea? Do you know what took place during this meeting?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 On a personal note, this somewhat pains me to see the lack of quality in education for home schoolers. My brother, who is also quite religious, has made the decision with his wife to home school his 3 kids (I think he has 20 more kids on the way too - those Southern Babtists love to multiply). While I do not doubt the intelligence level of he and his family, it pains me to see his religion interfere with his decision making ability on the science criterion he has chosen to teach his kids. To be able to allow matters of faith and the unobserved scuttle his judgement on matters of scientific fact and observation really pisses me off to no avail, but of course I would never tell him how to bring up his own kids. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Now I'm going to ask you something off the topic of evolution, so I hope you will respond. Since there's a little stearing of the topic towards atheism, I'd like to ask you the following: What is the Council of Nicaea? Do you know what took place during this meeting? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 So Noah managed to put millions of species into a 300 meters long ship???? How did he manage to get cangaroos and bring them back to Australia??? Cain was banished from the garden of eden and found himself a wife??? Abraham's tribe grew from several people to millions in few hundred years??? How do you explain the contradictions between verses, like Genesis 1:11 and 1:27, and Genesis 2:5-2:7??? Bible can not be taken literally because it is obviously contradicting itself, not to mention logic and reason. It is written in metaphores or even worse, it is based on misinterpreted parts of early jewish mythology. |
| quote: |
| Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. Genesis 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. |
| quote: |
| The Old Testament is a collection of a few selected Jewish mythological stories. Have you ever noticed that sometimes it seems like parts of it are missing? That's because they are. Some of those stories were shortened and some were not mentioned at all. Do you know the full story of Cain and Abel and why the jews are circumcised? Well, it goes somewhat like this: |
| quote: |
| Adam's first wife was Lilith, and she bore him a son, Cain. She was evil, so god banished from the Garden of Eden. She went into the outside world and mated with demons, and somehow became a demon herself. God sent his angels to defeat those demons, but didn't manage to defeat her. From that point onward, she comes during the night and kills the jewish children as a revenge. But circumcised children aren't affected, as their circumcision is a sign they are in direct link with god. |
| quote: |
| Now, for Adam god created a new wife, Eve. She bore him Abel, and as you know, Cain killed him. God banished Cain into the outside world, where he somehow found himself a wife, although he was the only human in the world. His children, however, started to feed on the blood of the Abel's children, or became vampires in other words. |
| quote: |
| The new testament, on the other hand, is an modification of the egyptian solar cults of Osiris and Horus suited for the later political situation of roman provinces of Iudea and Galilea. Resurrection, savior of people who enabled them to reach the afterlife, birth around late december, performing miracles, exorcising demons...sound familiar? Well, Jesus was not the first god with those characteristics. I've found a link that seems to be relatively good at explaining the origins of the early essene-christian faith:http://www.geocities.com/pagancx/cover_page_osiris.htm |
| quote: |
| Or if you're too lazy to read it all, then just read these few subpages... Osiris: http://www.geocities.com/pagancx/os..._similarity.htm Horus: http://www.geocities.com/pagancx/ho...imilarities.htm Christianity: http://www.geocities.com/pagancx/as..._basic_page.htm |
| quote: |
| It is obvious that you haven't seen the link. It is not just an article, it is a full non-distorted bible, with footnotes pointing out logical fallacies. |
| quote: |
| I quoted that damn verse from the bible I have here on my desk!!! It is the same bible as the one in the site I mentioned earlier, "The Holy Bible, New Intertnational Version". It was given to me by "Faith Evangelical Free Church" of Grand Forks. That page is an actual bible page, as it contains all the material written in the actual bible. |
| quote: |
| Yes, but what was his sin? He ate from a tree god told him not to eat from. The tree gave him knowledge to separate good from evil. God told him he will die if he eats from it, but he didn't die, he was just banished. Notice here that god lied. |
| quote: |
| It sounds to me like god threw Adam and Eve out of the garden because they showed the potential to become as powerful as the gods living there are. |
| quote: |
| Genesis 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden. |
| quote: |
| Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: |
| quote: |
| It does not have missing links. Missing links were a problem during the introduction of the theory in 19th century. Now links have been found for pretty much every speciation. There are countless examples of fossile species that are half way between those that are now different. You haven't answered any of my earlier questions on the subject because you can't. How do you explain fossiles like archeopteryx? How do you explain semi-compatible species, like horses and donkeys? How do you expain the nylon eating bacteria that appeared in 1970s? For god's sake, how do you explain all the extinct species? How do you explain that all the species that now exist are not found in old fossile records, yet the old rocks contain completely different species of animals? |
| quote: |
| Besides, the bible does not deny revolution. It just says god created birds, fish, land animals and plants. It does not say those creatures can't evolve. Even the catholic church now accepts that evolution is a probable theory. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 I agree, the whole concept of home education is pretty dangerous. Children should be obligated to go to public schools like they are in Europe. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Nessa- I'm afraid I'm going to take the same road as Occrider and consider this my last post to you in this particular thread. It may actually be the last time I debate with you altogether (and I use that word "debate" rather lightly), but that remains to be seen. My reasons are the following: |
| quote: |
| 1. It is painfully obvious that you have refused to read any rebuttal material I or anyone else has posted. The fact that you continue posting the wrong title of a book that you have not read (and that I've thoroughly read and rebutted), i.e. "the case for faith" when it's actually called "The Case for Christ", clearly speaks volumes about your intellectual honesty. |
| quote: |
| 2. You have very little skills at all in debating. You have willingly or unwillingly avoided specific points addressed to your creationist arguments, and have offered no supportive evidence in your counterpoints. The only counterargument you've made was a website that was already rebutted, and a book that you continued to misstate the title (and was clearly knocked down by myself and other critics that I've posted). You mention you have other sources, yet you fail to give those sources. This is very familiar with your arguments on Iraq's WMD and the reasons for war - you cited the similarities between this war and the Spanish War, yet you consistently refused to specify with your arguments. A pattern in your arguments is evident. In effect, this has made any arguments you've had very suspect. The idea behind a debate is to voice your opinion or stance on the matter and be able to support such opinions with solid evidence. So far you have shown none. |
| quote: |
| On a personal note, this somewhat pains me to see the lack of quality in education for home schoolers. My brother, who is also quite religious, has made the decision with his wife to home school his 3 kids (I think he has 20 more kids on the way too - those Southern Babtists love to multiply). While I do not doubt the intelligence level of he and his family, it pains me to see his religion interfere with his decision making ability on the science criterion he has chosen to teach his kids. To be able to allow matters of faith and the unobserved scuttle his judgement on matters of scientific fact and observation really pisses me off to no avail, but of course I would never tell him how to bring up his own kids. |
| quote: |
| I will tell you this, Nessa. If you choose to go to a public college (and I pray you do), you are in for quite a rude awakening in your biology courses. You will find that nothing in the biological sciences make sense whatsoever without knowing and understanding the fundamental concepts of evolution. It is something that you cannot fake merely to get by (unless you cheat, of course). You might be able to then understand that the biological science researchers use evolution as a premise for all understanding, because there is simply no other premise that makes more sense for their research. |
| quote: |
| Something tells me, however, that a public university is not in your future, or shall I dare say, in the future your parents and/or church require you to follow. |
| quote: |
| Now I'm going to ask you something off the topic of evolution, so I hope you will respond. Since there's a little stearing of the topic towards atheism, I'd like to ask you the following: What is the Council of Nicaea? Do you know what took place during this meeting? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 what if I didn't want to learn about evolution in schools? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 If you see it fit for you,go ahead. No, My mom has that book and "the case for faith". There's two books,I'm sure of it. If I have very little skills for debating,how have I won 13 debates? ( Maybe not here,but I've debated elsewhere about politics and such. Let me tell you,these people weren't half as stubborn as you here,and these people were adults.) No, I didn't refuse to. I told you to go look it up in a history book,that's the easiest way to look it up. That's a personal attack.I'm going to have to ask you to stop. I have no other choice but to homeschool.You don't understand,and I don't want you picking on that subject. I used to attend public school,there's a reason I don't anymore. I don't believe in evolution,Macro evolution because it is false. No question asked. My parents make the decision they think is correct. I wouldn't be pushing it on that subject if I were you. Right now, I'm not physically able to attend public anything, I'd rather not discuss why. Nicaea? That doesn't have anything to do with Catholocism,does it?http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum01.htm |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.