Nightlion wrote:I notice that nobody made a comment on my best point that there is not sufficient variety of humans as there is of dogs and birds and fish. SO? How's that possible? Shouldn't there be as many varieties of elephants, lions, hippopotami? Hmm? Who is keeping so much randomness in a limited order.
It's called natural selection. Besides, there is quite a variety of primates, of which humans are one species.
I like you, James, but I can't take your position seriously, as it betrays a serious ignorance of evolutionary science.
Nightlion wrote:I notice that nobody made a comment on my best point that there is not sufficient variety of humans as there is of dogs and birds and fish. SO? How's that possible? Shouldn't there be as many varieties of elephants, lions, hippopotami? Hmm? Who is keeping so much randomness in a limited order.
Your best point?????
Fish represent many species as do birds. You must learn about biological classification. You seem not to be aware of species, genus, family, order, class, and so on. Birds form an order called "aves". If we look at the level of families instead of species we do find that the primate family is very diverse. If we look at the level of class then we are in the class of mammals and we find even more variety.
We are just one species of ape.
How very very silly that you compare a single species (humans) with birds which is a whole class. You should compare birds with mammals or, alternatively, you could compare a single species of bird with homosapiens. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_classification
Last edited by W3C [Validator] on Sun Jul 31, 2011 11:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
when believers want to give their claims more weight, they dress these claims up in scientific terms. When believers want to belittle atheism or secular humanism, they call it a "religion". -Beastie
yesterday's Mormon doctrine is today's Mormon folklore.-Buffalo
If I believed in this God of yours, petty and impotent though he appears to be, I would thank him profusely that you are not in any sort of position of authority over the children of men.
eschew obfuscation
"I'll let you believers in on a little secret: not only is the LDS church not really true, it's obviously not true." -Sethbag
="NightlionCould not care less how ignorant I come off towards the blasphemy of our day, a casual insult to mock God that will cause the earth to burn as an oven, as God's hot displeasure and fury comes up in his face for vengeance, cruel wrath and a burning recompense.
Evolution is the party line that has seized by force the conscience of the learned. There is no honesty in science when all thought MUST sift through the vicious sieve of denying God. Why should I respect it in the least? You crumble to the overbearing enthusiasm of orgy science. Such decadence takes nothing away from God. It only defiles humanity. It is to me as absurd now as it will be to all the world when God's wrath has made a full end of all nations. And, obviously, that great desolation comes upon the world for a cause that is eternally just. Not smart to insult your creator.
Ignoring the vain yadda yadda yadda, I will respond to one point. You should care about how ignorant you look. If, on the off chance, you really do have a valid point buried somewhere in the yadda yadda yadda, it's completely lost and dismissed due to your overwhelming ignorance on the subject.
Last edited by Tator on Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
The panic was the overwhelming evidence of creation that pinned the truth to the roof. The only way science could rid themselves of the Omnipresence Dynamic was to panic and rewrite an entire new script that ignores God.
Its kind of like the microcosmic dimension where MDD denies that I exist and my doctrine does not exist and my gifts do not exist and my testimony does not exist, and that I do not have a better answer for everything. That is the ONLY way they can continue valid. I panic them.
Science craves validity and by removing God their validity goes through the roof. So the value they receives betrays their motive for theocide.
Instead of relying on the voices in your head for information about science, why not try reading a science book? Just sayin.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
I love it when the religious zealots reveal their true colors. In all of Nightlion's ignorant ramblings on evolution, at least we got this nugget of truth that fairly well describes the root of nearly all religious belief.
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain "The LDS church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo
Let's suppose for a moment that some time in the future it is demonstrated that biological evolution is not how the diversity of life developed on this planet. Does this validate the nonsense that is god?
HINT: Nope!
"Sire, I had no need of that hypothesis" - Laplace
