|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9..19~20~21 [Next] | ||||||||||
Destiny Inner circle 1429 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-05 09:13, Carrie Sue wrote: Hardly a controversy in my mind - certainly nothing to equal your equivocation over what is stealing (which it appears to be the stealing other people do) or the revelation that sins have an alphabetical ranking (and of course the bad ones are the ones other people do). Do you notice a pattern in my thinking? Let me be certain I am clear. You seize on bits of Leviticus which pertain to other people, as terrible sins, and ignore the bits that affect you. You talk up the commandment on adultery for all it's worth but downplay the one on stealing and even claim some stealing is 'not exactly' stealing, just as any killing which you find convenient is not exactly killing. Now I actually agree with you on some of these points but the problem is you wish to affect the laws of the land so that they reflect the teachings of a book you claim to be perfect while dismissing, or equivocating, or placing conditions on - the bits you find inconvenient. In my opinion, you would do well to consider, before firing of more cliched defenses of your religion, whether you are living by the tenets of that religion, or adapting your religion to how you live. |
|||||||||
Destiny Inner circle 1429 Posts |
"This planet doesn't have a use-by date. But it does have resources and I think it's silly for the government to put them off limits because of the ludicrous idea that we are destroying the planet by merely living our lives."
I would add I think you have the bull by the horns here - I would respectfully suggest the correct judgements on the husbandry of resources would be better made by considering the abundance or scarcity of such resources - not how you live your life. |
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
Carrie, it's not that it's important that it be not true, it's that truth is important, and purging fiction from history is important.
The question is, why is it so important to YOU that it IS true? Also, I just want to make sure I understand you correctly. You believe that, over several thousand years, a few thousand species evolved into the millions of species we have now, accepting that all species of cat, from sabertooth, to panther, to house cat, came from one single pair of cats, yes? However, you can NOT accept that over BILLIONS of years, enough time for, if diversity happened like you are able to accept, the diversity development you accept, to happen MILLIONS of times over, that all life could come from the same beginnings? So, one pair of primates, to the hundreds of species we have now, in several thousand years, acceptable, but that one pair of monkeys possibly coming from the same ancestor as us humans, if given BILLIONS of years, not a chance, does that sum up your position? So, you can imagine the diversity coming about in a few thousand years going from thousands to millions, but you can not fathom that, over billions of years, one life form could have reached those "initial" thousands? Thousands to millions, in a short span of time, ok, 1 to thousands in a **** LOAD of time, not possible? Sorry to keep re-wording this and repeating myself, I'm just trying to rap my head around it.
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
Carrie Sue Veteran user Auburn, MI 332 Posts |
Glenn,
Mind if I rap your head? :) Yes, my position is that there are limits to evolution. The genetic code only goes so far. You can crossbreed dogs for millions of years and you will still get dogs. You will not get whales. I don't know exactly where the dividing line is, but again, there are limits. The taxonomic charts and cladistic interpretations are made by men, but it is clear that God did not send two of what we call "species" to escape the flood on Noah's ark. It was probably closer to what we call animal families--two cats, two dogs, two bears, two giraffes, and so on. And time cannot be the magic element, even if that were possible. Time does not add new information to the genetic code. Time (i.e., mutation) only takes information away or scrambles information already present. Study genetics for any length of time and you can see that anything other than micro-evolution has never been observed or induced by scientists. Humans and bananas did not have a common ancestor. The goo-to-you-by-way-of-the-zoo theory just does not have a monkey leg to stand on. Carrie |
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
But time can be used to "add new information" to get from a pair of monkeys to nearly 400 varieties, everything from gorillas, to lemurs, but you simply can NOT include humans in there. You don't know where the line is, but it absolutely MUST be between us and them.
Also, if the continents divided during the flood, how did the animals get redistributed all over the world? Did Noah have to also spend time following the breeding of all the thousands of kinds, and then travel around the globe spreading their off spring? How humans spread around, well, we had boats, but I doubt you believe penguins built their own boats and floated south after the flood.
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-05 12:06, Carrie Sue wrote: Maybe I've found your problem. Not one evolutionary biologist on the planet thinks you could. Perhaps you would benefit from a more accurate view of evolution. John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-05 12:17, Magnus Eisengrim wrote: John, don't you remember, creationists get to redefine all the terms so that they fit into what they claim is not possible. Creationists are who et to define micro vs macro evolution, as well as taxonomy, so long as they don't have to draw any actual lines. Just say the line exists, vaguely between certain lines we have already drawn. This way, if/when it can be shown that different "kinds" can evolve from previous "kinds" they can say "no, that's still of the same 'kind' because we don't know where the actual line is, so it can never support science's claims, only our."
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
kcg5 Inner circle who wants four fried chickens and a coke 1868 Posts |
So now that we know Carrie wrote it, she gets off? she gets a pass for that brilliant little paragraph?
Carrie, when you are presented with facts, it seems your bring up another subject-I.e gay marriage.... Why is this? As you know, I think anyone should marry anyone. How does it affect YOU?
Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!!!!!
"History will be kind to me, as I intend to write it"- Sir Winston Churchill |
|||||||||
Bill Hilly Elite user 449 Posts |
My favorite parts so far:
Quote:
On 2011-01-03 20:14, Carrie Sue wrote: No, I don't. Quote:
On 2011-01-03 22:07, Destiny wrote: ZING! Quote:
On 2011-01-04 00:30, Destiny wrote: The BEST common sense post as of the time I write this list. Thank you Destiny Quote:
On 2011-01-04 13:50, Magnus Eisengrim wrote: I'm sorry no one else got this. I like Bill Cosby too. Quote:
On 2011-01-04 14:07, MagicSanta wrote: I can't believe everyone let this go by too. It deserves some Quote:
On 2011-01-04 14:58, Carrie Sue wrote: Most of what you write is pitiful male bovine excrement, but this part was a good one. Quote:
On 2011-01-04 17:29, EsnRedshirt wrote: Quote:
On 2011-01-04 17:55, MagicSanta wrote: Santa's channeling Jimmy Buffet Quote:
On 2011-01-04 19:03, MagicSanta wrote: I though so too. But I was afraid the mathophobes would want me put to death. Quote:
On 2011-01-04 19:20, Carrie Sue wrote: Put your own mean thoughts here. I'm going to try to be nice today. It's funny though. Quote:
On 2011-01-04 19:49, Steve_Mollett wrote: Made me laugh out loud in a public library. Quote:
On 2011-01-04 20:02, Steve_Mollett wrote: Made me laugh louder. Quote:
On 2011-01-04 20:29, Al Angello wrote: Al's channeling Dear Abby. Not surprising since he's a Prine fan. Quote:
On 2011-01-04 22:56, Carrie Sue wrote: Which according to the original poster is: How's that thing that doesn't exist working for you? Well, I guess since it doesn't exist, it's not working at all; except of course to provide a reason for people to fight over it. How's that quadraphonic, atmospheric ionizing, time machine working for you? Quote:
On 2011-01-05 10:40, Destiny wrote: Again, another excellent, common sense post. If you keep being sensible Destiny, they'll throw you out of here. Quote:
On 2011-01-05 12:06, Carrie Sue wrote: Yes, I put the quotes in. It makes all your ridiculous posts about what "exactly" (stealing, killing, sinning, etc.) is as opposed to "not-exactly" (stealing, killing, sinning, etc.) just plain funny. Quote:
And if you say you're just trying to be funny, it makes you look a lot less stupid. That's how I do it. |
|||||||||
NicholasD Inner circle 1458 Posts |
If I made a list of a thousand things to worry about, global warming/climate change wouldn't even make the list.
|
|||||||||
kcg5 Inner circle who wants four fried chickens and a coke 1868 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-04 23:02, Carrie Sue wrote: I mean, WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE, WHERE ARE THE FACTS. (You have driven me into the "all caps" area, a place I do not like to be). Is it possible for you to have a link to back up your claims that does NOT come from a faith based site? Both links you provided are from the same site, and are slightly biased...
Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!!!!!
"History will be kind to me, as I intend to write it"- Sir Winston Churchill |
|||||||||
Magnus Eisengrim Inner circle Sulla placed heads on 1053 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-05 14:57, Beano wrote: Brilliance! Thanks John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats |
|||||||||
Bill Hilly Elite user 449 Posts |
Thanks John.
|
|||||||||
Carrie Sue Veteran user Auburn, MI 332 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-05 12:15, gdw wrote: If my theory on families is correct, then all the "monkeys" would be from the family Hominidae. And yes, humans are distinctly different and not related to them. I believe that human beings were specially created by God apart from the entire animal kingdom. There's no new information in any of the varieties of monkeys if "monkey kind" was created by God. It's a basic "familial" genotype, just arranged differently. Again, there is a huge difference between them and, say, ostriches. I don't think apes and ostriches have a common ancestor. That is too much of a geno-stretch. Carrie |
|||||||||
Carrie Sue Veteran user Auburn, MI 332 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-05 13:42, kcg5 wrote: Perhaps you'd wish to discuss that in private. I'm willing. Carrie |
|||||||||
critter Inner circle Spokane, WA 2653 Posts |
I had a clever retort, but I'm trying to be more tolerant of others' intolerance.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers |
|||||||||
kcg5 Inner circle who wants four fried chickens and a coke 1868 Posts |
Carrie, we have. I know what bothers you-how they have sex EWWWWWW!!!!, and such. But, if there were married men walking down the street of your bubble town, how would it affect you? What would be different?
Why do you always bring something like this up when it has nothing to do with the subject?
Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!!!!!
"History will be kind to me, as I intend to write it"- Sir Winston Churchill |
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-05 16:16, Carrie Sue wrote: Ok, since you are so convinced your theory is supported by evidence, what "evidence" is there that keeps humans OUT of the Hominidae family? Besides "this old book says so." What is the evidence that actually backs up that claim?
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
Carrie Sue Veteran user Auburn, MI 332 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-05 16:37, kcg5 wrote: Actually, I only referred to it in passing. It wasn't the focus of this thread. Amazing, though, how some people glom onto it so as to derail the discussion. Carrie |
|||||||||
Carrie Sue Veteran user Auburn, MI 332 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-05 16:47, gdw wrote: Biologically speaking there may not be anything. But those things that are not of the body--self-awareness, consciousness, a sense of morality, a knowledge of history and an ability to imagine the future, etc.--there the great gulf sits between human beings and animals. Besides which, animals don't have a soul. We do. Carrie |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » How's that global warming working out for you? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9..19~20~21 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.08 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |