Please stay single for the rest of your lives; you are terrible exes.
They should really hide the keys to the medicine cabinet more thoroughly. Those aren't candy boxes, kid.
I hardly ever bother with remixes. When songs get more versions of themselves, things just complicated. I'd use the creativity I have for new material, rather than regurgitating older stuff. Not to say that remixes are always worse, on the contrary, but I can live without them.
Yeah, I figured KHV had a bunch of them. They don't really hide it either. XD I don't know many people from KHV on a personal basis but I can...
They're not harming anyone with it, so your hating them is actually quite childish. If they want to display their cartwheeling skills they should go right ahead. They gamble with their own ego: you might get the attention you crave and be a hero, or you might be ignored and fall flat on your face. Whatever suits their fancy. The thing is, they often succeed in gathering a crowd around them (the more talented ones do anyway) so we're all to blame for them still being around.
Prince Of Persia Better than I thought it would be. In fact I found it really entertaining.
It is a troll forum, but one that tries to convey how Christians would be if they'd actually take the bible literally to the letter. Furthermore, I knew you were going to say that so I gave a more valid real-life example in the very sentence after that. Comes down to the same thing imo, but whatever works. That wasn't the intention at all actually. We know why you were here. I did understand (whether I cared is a different matter). But you did question evolution at one point, and we just returned the favor. The subject of evolution eventually started to play a larger role in both our replies (until recently), but we're both to "blame" for that (even though it is, as I said, conform to the original purpose of this thread). It takes two people to have a discussion. Sorry to burst another of your fragile bubbles, but I didn't misunderstand you. I've known from the very beginning that your core message was that "Anyone is free to believe anything.". But that was hardly an answer to the statement at hand. Patsy questioned the intelligence of creationists, not their rights. Besides, the best way to solidify your claim of creationists not being dumb is by holding your own in a debate on said subject. You may not be a hardcore creationist but you are still a creationist. Hence a demonstration of wit and wisdom would be in order for you to back your claim of "We're not stupid." up. What you said about "siding with your own view" is basically a paraphrased version of "convincing them", which I quite literally said in that piece of text you quoted. And the crossing swords thing was a figure of speech...something you may want to familiarize yourself with if you want to have a go at understanding Hamlet. These for example are indications that you're being a sore loser. And sadly, you too have sunken to the depths of insult by now. You would've had more credibility if you didn't give in to that. It's true that debates such as this one hardly ever serve a practical use. But the same can be said about religion in general. Guys, I think we should leave it at this. February, I don't want to silence you or anything but if you still have anything to say in your defense then do so by other means (VM or PM). This thread should focus on the Creationism debate from now on.
I'll mail it to you then if that's okay. What's your e-mail?
Next month will be rather difficult. I'm leaving for Africa in early July. Takes a lot of preparing and all that. I can try to host it on the 1st...
Try again. I used that bridge example for another argument. Yeah, because throwing a random link out there proves everything. This is what I meant when I said that you're not very fond of logic. Read what Jedi says; resting is not part of a creation process. It is part of the creation story, not of the creation process. If I made insults to your intelligence, then I must have found them to be in order. You really haven't given an intelligent impression in this debate. Your sources have been questionable, your attacks on evolution have been refuted and you have misinterpreted my posts rather often. Debates can't be fun for everyone. More often than not you'll see your own views criticized or even second guessing yourself. Why do people debate, if not to convince themselves of the validity of their thinking? What is a discussion if it isn't crossing swords with each other and put each other's views to the test? And you should notice what this thread is about. This isn't the "Reprimand other members for their behaviour" topic. This is a debate thread about Creationism, which we have been doing. Calling out other members can be done via PM or VM. By entering a thread with a certain subject I expect that person to at least have an interest in that subject.
Fair enough. But I know how Patsy Stone debates. If he doesn't post his views, then it isn't because he is cowering away. That is true. But taking the bible literally may lead to situations like this: http://www.landoverbaptist.net/ (This particular example is a parody site but similar communities exist, like the Westboro baptist church). It counts in the creation story, but God didn't create anything on the seventh day, thus saying he created the world in six days is still correct. If I were to say "The creation story spans six days.", then I would be wrong. They are subtle difference, but in a creationist debate they matter. It was still a question, wasn't it? When you have misread, or misinterpreted, or twisted as much of my posts as you have it's not too uncommon to wonder whether you were doing so deliberately or whether you're really not as...practiced in the Comprehensive Reading of debates and arguments. Furthermore you have accused me of being insulting before I said the example you used. I know the rules, thank you. And I know that I flirt with breaking them, but so far I believe I haven't broken any. Sure, I questioned your reading skills, and your knowledge on the theory of evolution, and I've teased and provoked you but I haven't resorted to name-calling or anything. Of course, as long as you can admit that your criticism was wrong when such is due.
Lamarck is the surname, Lamarckian is the adjective. Like Darwin and Darwinian evolution. You didn't mean it that way but you said it regardless. Darwin's coming up with the theory of evolution has went through the same process as a majority of hypotheses before his. His methods really weren't all that different from any scientist's. That's what Cyanide meant when he said that. Anyhow, I have a feeling we're straying off topic. Let's try and avoid that.
No, I said that the modern evolution theory is based on the same principles that have helped us in our daily lives. That being said, me saying that he didn't create anything on that day was still correct. No it isn't, as long as you play the ball and not the player. "You are stupid" is an insult. "Your ideas are wrong (and therefore stupid)" is brutally honest. Then you should have known that they are valid examples, and otherwise state why they aren't instead of laughing it off and revealing you have no comeback. By all means do so, if it fits the context like mine. Indeed. Which should help you draw conclusions, i.e. admit defeat. Your views have been weighed and measured by a number of people: JediNinjaZC, Guardian_Soul, White_Rook, Cyanide and myself and you have not come out on top. That's the sad truth.
Don't even remember why I quit updating it. You were the only reading it, I think. I could send you the whole first chapter at once. But I haven't...
But it's not really a current event anymore, is it? Please don't necrobump in these kinds of "news threads". -locked-
I might as well enter this month. XD === X Days Left This leaf is not coping well, Despite seeing spring turn to summer. The shift makes fate look all the dumber: Stubbornly reviving a verdant shell Around a single person's hell. This leaf dies young, what a bummer... Should I struggle or undergo it all? This visible loss of reason, This visceral change in season... Bleak skies should foreshadow fall, My fall... But outside summer skies are still a teasin'. But this leaf still has places to go, Even if leaves are of significance devoid. In my recent nightmares I have seen A destiny I wish to avoid: To turn rotten before passing green, To shrivel before my chance to grow. Don't ask this sore leaf why or how But the weather means so little now. I just ask for all the seconds I can get. Wind be still, be still as death. I hear your whistle and beg your breath Not to scrape me off this tree just yet.
Maybe you'll get a vote from the person who nominated you? I don't care all that much for being nominated, but something in me regrets not having written any new poetry lately. XD
Same here...and timexhasxgone isn't in it either. Then again, she left and I haven't written anything like forever... Not sure I'd be nominated if I did of course. There are far more talented writers on KHV.
Well, to be fair I started it. If she really resorts to the lower levels of name-calling I will give her a warning, but no sooner. It does come off as a bit suspicious though.
For the umpteenth time, it wouldn't be someone else's opinion. It would be his own opinion, backed by arguments that have been uised before. But since the point of the previous person still stands, re-iterating it would be an exercise in futility. How are you not understanding this? Because if the Bible would be false, the creation story in it loses its validity completely. Stating the obvious here of course, but anything other than the obvious just doesn't seem to do. I imagine my "classic mistake" was claiming that God created the world/universe/whatever in six days, right? Well, I just followed what I learned years ago: And on the 7th day he rested, but resting means not creating anything at all, so that day was excluded. Thus, he made the world in six days. No I said I could convince those with interests in science (by which I meant Biology specifically) that evolution is true. Different thing entirely. That's an F for Comprehensive Reading, young lady. Again, F for Comprehensive Reading. I didn't say that creationists never bash evolution. I said that I've never seen a creationist scientist bash evolution. Nor did I ever say it was impossible, I said it was unlikely (= improbable). Seriously, do they teach you to read in your school? Point still stands. They were theists; not necessarily creationists. That being said, I never argued that there are creationist scientists out there. But Cyanide has given an in-depth reply about this. And by resting on the 7th day he created what exactly? That would be about everything I've thrown at you so far. Disregarding the fact that I never even insulted you. I "assume" that the bible is false, not because of mere guessing, but because I have learned of an alternative that was more coherent, better observable and based on the same principles that have been successfully used to make our lives more convenient. Science has won its rounds so far; creationism hasn't. These are valid reasons to prefer evolution over a hollow creation myth. Not the Romans then? My mistake. (Note that this also completely kills the idea that I'd never admit my errors.) That being said, I do recall that not everyone believed Jesus to be the Messiah from the start. And that some were wary even after his many deeds that point at the direction of him being the Messiah. I'm not the one who is twisting things around. See above for examples. But if you still cling to the belief that I'm twisting things around, do be as kind as to tell me where I twisted your precious little words so I can refute what you said in ways you can't weasel yourself out of. Yes, they do. If you had any idea at all what I was trying to prove with them. Time to make another of of the already notorious two-by-two comparisons: The Bible's stories feature real-life environments, structures and practices. The fact that these things exist does not mean that the biblical events they appear in have actually occured. Terminator's story features real-life environments, structures and practices. The fact that these things exist does not mean that the story of Terminator really took place. Do you finally see now? I only had to change a few details in the comparison. Otherwire it tells the exact same thing, which even you can't deny to be true without making a complete fool out of yourself (although I wouldn't be surprised if you tried...). This is an assumption in itself. Pot kettle black: the sequel. I am arrogant, but I'm open for counterarguments. Ask some other members around here and they'll tell you that I'm a vicious opponent when debating (due to being arrogant), but one who can be reasoned with. And yet they make so much sense that you haven't been able to reply decently to even one of them, especially the ones regarding evolution. Peculiar... It takes two people to discuss something. You may not be a hardcore creationist (which I never suspected you to be, the hell do I know where you even got that from) but you felt the need to question evolution regardless. I refuted those doubts, since they were based on very shaky logic, and that was that. That's how debates go. And yet it's true. In fact, one of those intelligent Christians has replied to your very post. He's called Guardian_Soul, and he makes some very good points.
