tothewire
dorian
Enkill_Eridos
kayms99
lawman2
centered2
obama the antichrist
bingo little
princessxxx
horsservice
1minionsopinionDebate Page Archives
This page is a work in progress… when a new debate is started another will be archived and saved here.
Debate # 1. Kayms and Lawman debating Creationism vs Evolution 11/23/2008 – 11/
One Response to “Debate Page Archives”
-
January 4, 2009 at Sunday, January 4, 2009
foonquemn said
hello it is test. WinRAR provides the full RAR and ZIP file support, can decompress CAB, GZIP, ACE and other archive formats.
ydagkzryuhtrxkvrqfpptcrzncmfrpwfpkqhello
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eLawman.. your funny… you have a post on my debate page right before mine…is it just that you won’t answer ME on my debate page? what’s wrong with having another debate page? It’s not petty…it’s sensible…the more debates going on the better for the site and it would be really confusing if multiple debates were going on on just the one page.I think you are trying to get out of answering my point because you don’t know how to answer it…huh?Now, could you be nice to me just one more time and elaborate on the part about “and add post to wordpress toobar”… I’m really stuck on that… is there a “wordpress toolbar” link to add to “my favorites”?
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eStef… check out the movie on ch 11 … it was filmed here – I don’t know if you’ve seen it before or not..
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eKay go to this page to download and it also has better instructions: http://vodpod.com/wordpress/
Hope that helps girl!E_E I’ll try and IM you!
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ekay your god (or any god)does not interact with our universe at all, it is of no importance whether he exists or not.a thing which cannot even be detected in principle does not logically exist.things do not exist merely because they have been defined to do so.we know a lot about the definition of santa claus–what he looks like, what he does, where he lives, what his reindeer are called, and so on. But that still doesn’t mean that Santa exists.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eatheists are not unbelievers through ignorance or denial; we are unbelievers through choice.the vast majority of us have spent time studying one or more religions, sometimes in very great depth.we have made a careful and considered decision to reject religious beliefs.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ehave you heard ofthe theory of memetics talks of “memes”–sets of ideas which can propagate themselves between human minds, by analogy with genes.some atheists view religions as sets of particularly successful parasitic memes, which spread by encouraging their hosts to convert others.some memes avoid destruction by discouraging believers from questioning doctrine, or by using peer pressure to keep one-time believers from admitting that they were mistaken.some religious memes even encourage their hosts to destroy hosts controlled by other memes…i never really prescribed to this theory until i met you kay lolof course, in the memetic view there is no particular virtue associated with successful propagation of a meme. Religion is not a good thing because of the number of people who believe it, any more than a disease is a good thing because of the number of people who have caught it.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eok tothewire deleted the other post and re-posted them sorry about that
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ebiological evolution, simply put, is descent with modification. This definition encompasses small-scale evolution (changes in gene frequency in a population from one generation to the next) and large-scale evolution (the descent of different species from a common ancestor over many generations).evolution helps us to understand the history of life.and it is a fact vs YOUR fairy land beliefs
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eand before you start a worded debate with me on evolution you need to prepare yourself fist visit here http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_01you know i love berkeley tothewire
and don’t expect me to dummy my post down to you as we have all been doing lately YOU NEED A DICTIONARY so you will know each term used in this little debate you are now requesting to have with me
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eyou will need to visit this site: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_01
go there and read through each page before we start this little debate and make sure you have a dictionary as i will not dummy down my post just because you get lost in terms.
your willing choice to stay ignorant isn’t anything less than stupid.and i have little respect for ANYONE who likes to remain ignorant to protect themselves from obvious truths such as evolution.just as science has proven the world isn’t flat so has it proven evolution is still happening and a fact of life.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eyour post proved to me that the only material you read are the ones you write or the ones one of you other religion pushers write.if you would have read my page you wouldn’t have posted such a empty debate post to me.give me something of substance kay.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eGreat Lawman is on his stupid memes crap kick again and Kay on her reverse ignorance…anyone have popcorn?
Good luck to you both!
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eThe most complex evolution of life, and the most unlikely, took place long before the hominid appeared. It was a billion years after life appeared before the cell. It was the cell which become the basis for all modern life forms.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ethe evolution of life from its beginning through the development of the metazoa (primitive multicellular organisms) took billions of years. The earth’s atmosphere did not contain oxygen when the earth formed 4.6 billion years ago. This reducing environment provided favorable conditions for the natural synthesis of the first organic compounds. The first phospholipid bilayer membranes formed along with primitive RNA and DNA genetic molecules. the membranes adsorbed proteins and the hereditary DNA/RNA material. From these organic molecules, the first primitive prokaryote (simple single cell organism lacking a nucleus) arose. natural selection began.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ethe carbon dioxide in our atmosphere contains both 12C and 13C isotopes. when the carbon atoms of CO2 are captured by organisms in photosynthesis, the organisms show a definite preference for the light 12C isotope of carbon. they will incorporate the 12C isotope into the proteins, sugars, and other molecules that they synthesize preferentially to the heavier 13C isotope. Rocks that are 3.4 billion years old have been discovered which are enriched with the 12C isotope. the concentration of the 12C isotope shows the presence of photosynthesis. these early photosynthetic organisms used H2S as a source of hydrogen atoms instead of water and did not produce oxygen as a by-product.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eancient sediments are found which are rich in iron (Fe2+) as water soluble compounds. beginning at about 2.5 billion years ago, the sediments began showing iron oxides containing Fe3+ ions that were not water soluble. this shows that the atmosphere had changed from a reducing environment to an oxidizing one where oxygen was present. the oxygen in the atmosphere appears to have been generated by living organisms carrying out oxygen-producing photosynthesis. these newer organisms could obtain hydrogen by breaking down water instead of H2S to produce the hydrogen needed to synthesize carbon compounds. As a by-product of breaking down water, oxygen gas is formed.in the next billion years following the evolution of aerobic photosynthesizing bacteria, the first cells arose which had lost the ability to carry out photosynthesis and thus the ability to manufacture their own food from inorganic material. These cells relied on organic material (other life) as their source of food. The food chain was begun.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ehave anymore stupid questions kay?
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eto help fill in the next gap for you i’ll post some more about the evolution of “that” first cell…about 1.3 billion years ago the first eukaryote (a single cell organism with a complex inner structure) which contained many internal organelles such as mitochondria appeared, having evolved from the prokaryote. from the eukaryote, the multicellular metazoa (shown at left) evolved about 680 million years ago. all modern complex life developed from these.i asked you to go study a bit but you are too lazy to eductate yourself enough to have an intellectual debate.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eAND so it begins…Good night kids don’t keep me up with your debate…lolYou’re welcome Kay glad to help. I should have posted that in the first place! Sorry.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eThanks TTW… I finally figured it out…Lawman…
your argument that something doesn’t exist if it can’t be detected is weak because there are lots of things that we know exist but can’t detect.. ‘thoughts’ being one example.And I DO agree that atheists are non believers by choice… by their CHOICE to be ignorant…And I don’t know what to say about your memes theory…And referring to evolution is not a valid response either… I don’t deny the evolutionary concept…( we didn’t evolve from apes though) but you resorting to bringing that up just shows that you don’t have an answer… because my question is – where did that first cell come from that everything eventually evolved from? I quess I’m presenting to you a question much like the one that Rev Ray can’t answer… I would really like to know what your theory is of where that first cell came from? Since you have chosen not to believe in God you must have some other idea of the source of our existance then…
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eWhy do atheist take the silly ignorant stance that if something can be proven in science then that is PROOF that God doesn’t exist… what??? Proving something scientifically just means that you’ve figured out how God did it!! Something had to create the science… the materials used… it’s soooo hypocritical to point to science as the reason for our existance when it is that very science and logic that tells us that we shouldn’t / couldn’t be here!!So please tell me your theory on where the materials came from that were used to get the evolutionary PROCESS going…As I stated to another atheist… evolution is the PROCESS of existance… my question is where did the BIRTH of existance come from? And if you say the big bang theory like my friend tonight said … mentioning how scientists have created a machine to re-enact the big bang…I’ll just ask you where the equipement came from to get the ‘big bang’ started…
Again…Science is just us figuring out how God did / does it.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ei already aswered that for you kay. maybe you need a dictionary?
some people tend to see (perhaps deliberately) only a small part of Darwin’s Theory and then ignore the rest. that portion is “man descended from the ape”, which of course he didn’t say at all in the first place. that phrase when spoken alone tends to upset people and make them defensive. that’s why some people tend to keep repeating it over and over, often in a strident voice. darwin did surmise that man and ape came from a common ancestor. This is an entirely different concept – since he could have used an earthworm instead and been as truthful.in fact the human and a grain of wheat share about 27% of the same DNA structure – the earthworm far more. to make things worse the modern human is characterized by its belief that the sum total of life can be summarized into a bumper sticker making all other knowledge irrelevant. you have any bumper stickers kay?
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ewhere did that first living fragment come from, some 4 billion or more years ago? scientists will call its chance occurrence a singularity, an event with a near zero probability. religious people could call that a miracle if they wish to do so, an event with zero probability. the difference between these two concepts is itself near zero. to argue over this difference is foolish.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ebut you are the mother of foolish now aren’t you kay?
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eand i would truly be suprised that another atheist would take the time to talk to you kay, much less debate.maybe a very young atheist,one still in college or highschool.as you never address any points but the ones you think you are making.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eyou do know that resorting to insults just makes you look foolish… it’s the ’sore loser’ theory.I don’t care if you go back a zillion trillion gazillion years… it still doesn’t answer the question of where the first cell came from…. and the ‘chance occurance of singularity’ crap is no good either… it STILL doesn’t answer the fundamentally SIMPLE question…
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 etime for me to head to bed as well.as i need to wake up early enough to make it back here in time for tothewire to have fresh coffee brewed.before she heads off to play church with her VERY catholic family.guess she can’t find a church for “liberals” around here! LOL
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eGoodnite TTW and Lawman… hey maybe you can sleep on it and come up with some kind of ‘miracle’ answer tomorrow but … oh.. you don’t believe in miracles so I guess you’re out of luck… Man… I’m really good at this question stuff.. and you know the saying… if you can’t defend your view then maybe it’s time to change your view… or something like that…
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eit is a simple question kay and i already answered it.
your right i shouldn’t do that as it is my way of pissing with tothewire.i know it bothers her,but don’t you think she needs to jump off the damn fence and be one or the other…liberal or christian.i think her “nice” “nice” has always gotten in the way of her intellect.and you know damn good and well that when you read a post you don;t agree with you are tempted to respond to it the way i do.you and i aren’tso different in temperament.tothewire really isn’t “wired” that way…kind of always intrigued me even as kids.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eyou really do need to read each post a bit more careful i am tired of you expecting people to dummy down their responses to you.i will not answer your question AGAIN.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 egood night kay and don’t get to excited about having the last post as most people will read through them all and see how you neglect to aknowledge anyones answers other than your own.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eFine… but i’m going to post this anyway… maybe you’ll feel like answering tomorrow… otherwise I’m just going to add you to my long LONG list of people that have just given up because they can NO LONGER defend their stance that they have taken AGAINST GOD.You said..where did that first living fragment come from, some 4 billion or more years ago? scientists will call its chance occurrence a singularity, an event with a near zero probability. religious people could call that a miracle if they wish to do so, an event with zero probability. the difference between these two concepts is itself near zero. to argue over this difference is foolish.” to argue over this difference is foolish” that’s just like Rev Ray’s answer to the question I asked him… him saying that the choice is not between God and man but “rational and irrational” men… that’s the basis of the argument… who’s being rational…. just like you saying that arguing over the ‘difference’ is foolish… the fact that a difference exists is exactly my point!! What is the SOURCE of the EXISTANCE? I’m not asking about the difference (or the process) of anything…So you’re saying that the first living fragment came from a chance occurrence? An occurrance of WHAT? An event with a ‘near’ zero probability? Well the words ‘near zero’ implies some probability… What is this ‘probability’? What does this ‘probability’ consist of? This DOES NOT answer my question of where the first cell came from… And don’t feel bad… it’s an UN-ANSWERABLE question if you are trying to answer it in a scientific and logical way… IT CAN’T BE DONE!!
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ei answered where the first cell came from. are you daft?
here are a few for you..
if god exists, some evidence for this existence should be detectable by scientific means, especially considering the central role that god is alleged to play in the operation of the universe and the lives of humans. beyond a reasonable doubt the universe and life appear exactly as we might expect if there were no god.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ea god who deliberately hides from those who are open and willing to believe, given sufficient evidence, is not a moral god.many christians believe that the only way to salvation is through accepting jesus christ as their savior.everyone else is doomed to eternal fire.muslims hold similar beliefs.these faithful would, of course, insist that they believe in a loving, moral god, the inconsistency between this belief is obvious by noting their exclusive, hidden god.all i can say is that we have not one iota of evidence that he exists and, if he does exist,i personally want nothing to do with him. this is a possible god, but a hideous one. so you with NO evidence only an UNeducated guess questions my post FULL of evidence?
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eyour so called un answerable question has been answered 101 different ways to simplify it just for you would be a waste of time.maybe you should go read this book: The Cell: Evolution of the First Organism, by: Panno, Joseph OR Chemical Evolution: Structure and Model of the First Cellspontaneous creation – Random chemical processes created the first living cell vs supernatural creation – god or some other supernatural power(the tooth fairy)created the first living cell
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eso stop trying to look like you know what you are talking about miss “i can’t even quote scripture to debate with tothewire”your un answerable question only leaves you looking once again like an uneducated fool.
hell even i could have won the debate with tothewire using scripture to back it up AND I AM AN ATHEIST.you are lazy and that leaves you intellectually challenged.go read up on what you want to debate BEFORE you start a debate.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eyou have to be prepared to argue both sides of a debate,i could even debate evolution but to do so you have to have a general understanding of whatever you are going to debate.you never do so go read up a bit then come back with a real argument not just some quick pro question you got off the net or some bible thumpers site.this lack of topic knowledge is common with right wingers…but that Chaput site is different.i do have respect for several of those authors as they are well versed in each topic…knowing “both sides”.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ea thing which cannot even be detected in principle does not logically exist.things do not exist merely because they have been defined to do so.we know a lot about the definition of santa claus–what he looks like, what he does, where he lives, what his reindeer are called, and so on. But that still doesn’t mean that santa exists.kay your god does not interact with our universe at all,it is of no importance to me whether he exists or not but CAN YOU PROVE HE EXIST?
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eThank you for fixing that Lawman. You both need to be more careful before you post, and make sure you are not posting under MY name or anyone else’ except your own.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eYes TTW… I agree, sorry for the mixup…Lawman… you and TTW act like you are already married… because you both definitely think alike.. or debate alike at least… you bombard me with ’scientific’ stuff that you just coppied and pasted with the intention of making yourself look smarter and the bombarding part is just another tactic to overwhelm and create a diversion and confusion for the readers and myself… YOUR SO OBVIOUS! AND you also use the tactic of making a barrage of condascending statements that do not reflect at all on the issue but instead my incompetance… ALL of these things are just OBVIOUS tactics that are not fooling me and I hope no one else either.You keep alluding to how you did explain where the first cell came from ” are you daft?” ( no you are ). Just please spare me of the insults and just use the effort it takes to type the condascending remarks to just state the point again.. that makes so much more sense… but since you don’t do that, it’s obvious that you did not and you’re just trying to create the illusion that you did…. I hope you don’t actually try this stuff in court… I bet you wish you could though..huh?So… NO YOU DIDN’T explain where the first cell came from…Let me just use the titles of the books you reccommend as an example… why would I be stupid enough to read the whole book, like you suggest, when the title doesn’t even allude to the answer to my question??? Why do I have to keep explaining this to you???The book: The Cell: Evolution of the First Organism… AGAIN, there is the word Evolution!! I’m not talking about evolution.. the process of existance… clearly the book starts AFTER the first cell is created…and… Chemical Evolution: Structure and Model of the First Cell
Again… the “structure and model” of the first cell does NOT explain where the material of the structure came from… again…IT CAN’T BE DONE!! but certainly not for lack of trying… these scientific ‘intellectuals’ are extremely determined but it’s truly laughable to see them try…And yes… you got me.. I am energy challenged…but I have still posted more ORIGINAL material here than everyone else combined…
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 ekay go get yourself some “learnin” so you can at least learn how to prepare yourself for a debate and have material prepared for the debate.your silly childlike rebuttals are not worth responding to.i give you facts and you come back with look how originally ignorant my post are.grow a brain kay.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 eDo not compare me to lawman Kay just because he has made better points than you have on this debate. My post back to you have always been original, except when I tell you I am quoting a site or reference; and full of scripture to back up each argument.
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008 etothewire why did that bother you?we should be married.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eI think BOTH of you need to visit our 2 new pages Does God Exist part 1 http://tothewire.wordpress.com/face-off-does-god-exist-part1/ and Does God Exist part 2 http://tothewire.wordpress.com/face-off-does-god-exist-part2/
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ei thought you didn’t want to be in this debate?doesn’t this qualify for debating your religion?you feel the need to help kay out enough to cross your own lines?lol tothewire your intellect gets in the way of your faith doesn’t it?
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eJust providing some reference guides to even up the debate. Providing information is not the same as debating the content.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ethose pages do NOT PROVE your god exist.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eOnce again I must say I do not have the burden of proof. I just gave you the information and the burden of discernment is now yours. It is now between you, your heart, and God.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 egrrr i am not trying to prove your god doesn’t exist i just want you to prove that he does.
i have given proof of why i believe in evolution.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eIt is not my job to PROVE that God exist! My job is to give you the proof of WHY I believe in God. This is not debatable. I have given you the information, and now it is up to you to work out what you believe. AND the rest my friend is between you and God.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eYou should visit here : http://darwinbusters.com/
Once it is closed the comments will be removed from this page and can be accessed here : http://tothewire.wordpress.com/like-to-debate/debate-page-archives/
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ehey someone added me as a site admin!thank you!who did that?was it you tothewire?
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eNope. But since you (and my brother) have been updating the news content on the front page all the time, it is the fair and right thing to do.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ewell you have been doing it too and so has dorian and e_e. anyway thank you whoever it was.does this mean that i don’t have to log in under tothewire to have access to write pages and stuff now?
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eI am not sure how that works you need to ask E_E.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eWow… you did it again!… you just keep proving my point over and over…why didn’t you just post your ‘proof’ instead of another barrage of insults?? It’s really not that complicated…..
Just humor me and post once more where the first cell came from… NOT the evolution of the first cell…NOT the composition of the first cell…NOT any kind of process of anything… JUST where the first cell came from…
And TTW… he didn’t make better points than me… not by a long shot…and I have to say that the santa clause point was STUPID!! … all he did was copy and paste something he googled .. it probably took him 5 seconds max… he probably doesn’t even have a clue of what it means…
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eKay Lawman has several degrees to back up his knowledge of his post. You really shouldn’t make blind assumptions it will leave you open to getting your a** kicked in a real debate or court room. He also has had several of his works published. You are not helping your cause and just loosing points, if he used his own previous published work they are still his to use. Just as you keep using your reverse ignorance material. Do not assume you know more than he does when it comes to atheism or evolution. I certainly wouldn’t and I too have several degrees behind my name. Now with that said, do you really not understand his answer to you?
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ekay i will not play your childish game either you understand how to debate by having your material (reference points ready)or look like the idiot you are.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ei certainly will not keep answering your question over and over each time with a new dummied up version for you to understand.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 etothewire either get out of the way or get shot at as well.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eLawman get out of your way or get shot at as well? Do you not see how stupid that post was? OR DO YOU NEED ME TO DUMMY DOWN THIS POST AND POINT IT OUT?
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ei am just asking that you stop coddling her,i understand her motives here.you do not.you actually think she is here on some mission to save some souls…you might be by bringing them here with news and having pages above promoting your beliefs.BUT kay just likes to argue period.end of story.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eYou’re such a nerd. You two just let one of us know when you tire of debating a subject that theologians have debated over for years so we can start a new debate. Lawman you too like to argue so maybe you and Kay should hook up AS THAT IS THE ONE QUALITY THAT BOTHERS ME THE MOST ABOUT YOU.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eTTW… can you remind me of his answer to the question about where the first cell came from? Since he obviously won’t…
Lawman, I’m not asking for you to answer it over and over again.. just one more time ( a 2nd time) to clerify…
again… what I’m asking is really not that hard…. What’s the problem??
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eKay you were so right about him trying to mislead you with “too much information post” his answer really was this and I quote: where did that first living fragment come from, some 4 billion or more years ago? scientists will call its chance occurrence a singularity, an event with a near zero probability. religious people could call that a miracle if they wish to do so, an event with zero probability. the difference between these two concepts is itself near zero. to argue over this difference is foolish.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eAnd he has been baiting you ever since! I am sure this has brought him great joy knowing neither of you could out and out win this debate left nothing but rude comments and name calling left for him to use hoping to keep you going. I don’t like to debate with lawman simply because he gets off so to speak in the setting up part of the whole debate and then sliding in his intentions of making the other person come across as an idiot. He doesn’t debate fairly. He always choses a subject or topic he can do this with. You might say he holds all the cards when a debate is set up like this one. He receives joy out of the person he is debating doesn’t realize the trap.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ei really hate that you feel the need to explain anything to her.if she truly wants the answer fully she can read one of the books a recomended.
the real question here is this: kay your god does not interact with our universe at all,it is of no importance to me whether he exists or not but CAN YOU PROVE HE EXIST?
SO CAN YOU PROVE YOUR GOD DOES EXIST?
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eLawman you really are an empty person on the inside aren’t you? Empty and without feeling or respect for what others believe.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ei am without respect for what others believe?i just don’t care what others believe.kay is without respect for what others believe as she tries to demand others conform to her beliefs,NOT I.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eShe has stated her beliefs and questioned yours… don’t try and twist what we all have read
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eI noted you didn’t debate you being an empty person. Well time for me to go to bed as my vacation is over. Maybe we can update content together early in the morning before we head out? And then again when we come in. Tomorrow is the big day when Obama releases his picks.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ebig day for you maybe.i didn’t vote for the socialist
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ei don’t like the church or the government having any more control than they already do.when they start taking guns away from the honest people who do you think will still keep theirs?the criminals will!
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eGood night lawman. My new debate topic is how much rent should lawman have to pay me for the use of my spare room and lap top?
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eNo, you really hate that she has to try and “come to your rescue”…ESPECIALLY when the rescue didn’t succeed!!
So, is that the ‘answer’ that you were talking about Lawman? what TTW just posted… because I already disected that answer and explained that it did NOT answer my question…I’ll post it again here…
So you’re saying that the first living fragment came from a chance occurrence? An occurrance of WHAT? AND WHERE DID IT COME FROM??? An event with a ‘near’ zero probability? Well the words ‘near zero’ implies some probability… What is this ‘probability’? What does this ‘probability’ consist of? This DOES NOT answer my question of where the first cell came from… And don’t feel bad… it’s an UN-ANSWERABLE question if you are trying to answer it in a scientific and logical way… IT CAN’T BE DONE!!
And I explained the books too! The clearly indicate in the title that there is going to be no answer in the book as to where the first cell CAME FROM!
And yes… I DID prove in theory that God exists… because there is NO OTHER logical explanation!!! If you, or anyone else cannot answer my question… then there is your proof!!
And how in the world can you know that God does not interact in our universe? That is the most ridiculouse statement I think I’ve ever heard… that’s certainly something that you cannot prove!! Your statement that it is of no importance to you if he exists or not shows that you are not open to him and because of that you will NEVER see any interaction or signs from him. And that is your fault, not his…
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 elol avoiding a debate about that one i am.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ethat is to debate rent…now kay where is your proof that your god does exist?
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eI certainly didn’t come to his rescue Kay and I am getting tired of you being so arrogant to assume such things. You are disposed to exaggerate your own worth or importance often by an overbearing manner and it is annoying. Actually, you both do that.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eyou have never dissected any of my post it is beyond your capabilities.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ethe chance of your god theory is of zero probability
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eactually it can and has been done. here i will re paste just for you kay
Lawman2 Says:
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008
The most complex evolution of life, and the most unlikely, took place long before the hominid appeared. It was a billion years after life appeared before the cell. It was the cell which become the basis for all modern life forms.
Lawman2 Says:
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008
the evolution of life from its beginning through the development of the metazoa (primitive multicellular organisms) took billions of years. The earth’s atmosphere did not contain oxygen when the earth formed 4.6 billion years ago. This reducing environment provided favorable conditions for the natural synthesis of the first organic compounds. The first phospholipid bilayer membranes formed along with primitive RNA and DNA genetic molecules. the membranes adsorbed proteins and the hereditary DNA/RNA material. From these organic molecules, the first primitive prokaryote (simple single cell organism lacking a nucleus) arose. natural selection began.
Lawman2 Says:
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008
the carbon dioxide in our atmosphere contains both 12C and 13C isotopes. when the carbon atoms of CO2 are captured by organisms in photosynthesis, the organisms show a definite preference for the light 12C isotope of carbon. they will incorporate the 12C isotope into the proteins, sugars, and other molecules that they synthesize preferentially to the heavier 13C isotope. Rocks that are 3.4 billion years old have been discovered which are enriched with the 12C isotope. the concentration of the 12C isotope shows the presence of photosynthesis. these early photosynthetic organisms used H2S as a source of hydrogen atoms instead of water and did not produce oxygen as a by-product.
Lawman2 Says:
November 23, 2008 at Sunday, November 23, 2008
ancient sediments are found which are rich in iron (Fe2+) as water soluble compounds. beginning at about 2.5 billion years ago, the sediments began showing iron oxides containing Fe3+ ions that were not water soluble. this shows that the atmosphere had changed from a reducing environment to an oxidizing one where oxygen was present. the oxygen in the atmosphere appears to have been generated by living organisms carrying out oxygen-producing photosynthesis. these newer organisms could obtain hydrogen by breaking down water instead of H2S to produce the hydrogen needed to synthesize carbon compounds. As a by-product of breaking down water, oxygen gas is formed.
in the next billion years following the evolution of aerobic photosynthesizing bacteria, the first cells arose which had lost the ability to carry out photosynthesis and thus the ability to manufacture their own food from inorganic material. These cells relied on organic material (other life) as their source of food. The food chain was begun.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ethe probobility of this theory is greater than that of your petty god theory who has shown no scientific proof of his existans with a probability of zero. You haven’t proved in theory your god exist…you just have faith…lol
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 enext time don’t be so polite to her tothewire and then you won’t get your hand bit…lol
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eGood night
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 enow don’t be all mad at me just because she is daft. lol
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ekay guess i’ll respond to your silly post all by myself…hehehe no help from your tag team posting pages for you lol
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 enow tell me again what scientific evidence you have that god exist kay? i have given you just a small bite of some of my insights into science vs god…why not give me a taste of yours?
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eoh that is right you have no scientific evidence do you?
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eI did prove my point in theory and you know it… can’t you just admit that you cannot answer the question?? Don’t be like Rev Ray and just ignore the question… you CAN keep your dignity if you can be honest enough to acknowledge your inability to answer.
TTW… I know it’s annoying but it’s the best defense I have to an abusive offense… if someone can’t be honest then I am not going to respond in a ‘respectful’ way… that’s just how I feel… I know that is not the Christian thing to do… I know I should “turn the other cheek” I’m still working on that… it’s just too tempting to resist at the moment… pride and arrogance are too fun to tear down… mine is there too but I know how weak it is and I am prepared for the fall.
My sister in law made a great point today…about how the deciples were told that if a town rejected the Gospel then they were to shake the dust from their feet as they left…
So I should just give up Lawman and others because they have clearly made their choice… but I still need to think that thru.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 esanta has at least had some sightings reported on the local news every year…lol your god? nope not one.since your god is so jealous and petty why wouldn’t he show himself or reveal himself to us little peasants her on earth?why would the church fear science for so many years if they felt their god theory was hole proof?
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eKay I completly understand where you are coming from. It is hard to just walk away from an agument that you know you are right about. and YOU are right. But lawman has built a wall around his heart that even I can’t get through to him. I just have to leave it up to God. Sometimes we do have to hand things over to him and trust that he knows better than we do. I struggle at times with pride and I am sure everyone does. I think I just get kind of cranky late at night as I am a morning person not a night owl. This debate that he is trying to drag you into my advise is for you to ignore him you have stated how you feel the burden of proof is not ours to prove.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ewhy would i admit to something that i have already posted an answer to?
i haven’t built a wall around my heart when it comes to you tothewire.i never have
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ei never will.
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eTTW… I know you are right…but in this instance it is really hard to walk away from this debate because I KNOW I have PROVEN my point…and with Lawman, who prefers to have proof before he believes…he has made it actually easier than if we were debating on philisophical (sp?) points, which he is obviously now trying to ‘move over to’ because he knows that I have proven the logical point… huh lawman?.. again.. you’re so obvious…
But I’m retiring also… will continue later though… oh, I wanted to mention… I posted another video on the other page… mine keep posting at the top..sorry, I don’t mean to do that..what am I doing wrong? but I did notice something really cool… the youtube video has other scrolling videos by the same artist after the song has played!…
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 eNo you can add video top or bottom doesn’t matter. Top may be good so people can see the new content. I like that about youtube!
November 24, 2008 at Monday, November 24, 2008 ethat was very entertaining, lawman, kay, tothewire. a great way to start my monday morning. wish i had popcorn.
lawman, you presented your scientific evidence re. the origins of man, that knocks out the christian fundamentalist theory of evolution in your view alright. my inner nerd loved that you laid out elements/atoms/isotopes etc.. still doesn’t prove the invisible hand of God isn’t all around, interacting with all that is. you ask for proof that God exists?how do you explain faith? i think God needs no intellectual or scientific explanation. it comes from the heart. how do you prove love exists?same thing.
nuclear physics can manipulate isotopes and come up with the formula to create a bomb that can wipe out a whole country alright
and no one can still give scientific proof and evidence that God exists. that doesn’t mean faith in God should be invalidated.no reason why anybody with a high i.q and advanced degrees cannot have both science and God…both can be considered theoretical, both definitely subscribe to belief. a mind that can incorporate both faith and logic, objective and subjective is an impressive mind. tothewire has those qualities. i don’t know why you’re so baffled by that. i don’t see her contradicting herself in her arguments.