J.T.

That is completely reasonable.

How is it you have not yet visited my debate thread about war and religion?

Since you've used arguments involving war and religion, I really do think it would be wise if you'd add your critical analysis.

Hey man longtime no c blad ^_^

Now, what struck me as soon as I saw the "curved" argument was the way he was basically arguing from almost complete subjectivity. I think God's design must be best evidenced by potatoes, because french fries are clearly a gift from God. LOL

And that Barton dude is messed up. The idea of a "one-way" wall of separation should have been suspected instantly as modern-sounding, specifically because it is almost logically impossible.

(And from what I've heard, Huckabee's not planning to run. I hear he's got a TV show, which might make me tend toward believing that he won't run.)

I've heard only a few things about that banana argument, including the fact that bananas have been selectively bred and are therefore not designed by God. I almost hate to ask it like this, but what else was wrong with it?

I thought of asking who David Bartle is, but then I decided to do a search. Unfortunately...it seems there are too many David Bartles. So I am lost unless I ask about the one you mentioned....

And the dude whom he quoted also says the number would be greater than the number of atoms in the universe! When anyone gets an inequality where people>atoms then they are just using the wrong math.

One of the things I really hated about the book was the way he didn't stick to the topic of scientific facts in the Bible. He even felt the need to quote what political figures through history felt about the Bible. This, of course, was made much worse by quoting Thomas Jefferson as though he were a genuine believer, and not one who literally cut and pasted a Bible together.

I'm planning some article about some really wrong statements from Christians and atheists, and on the Christian side, I have some serious criticisms of Ray Comfort and that other guy.

I meant to respond sooner, but you know, a misreading is no big deal. On that note, I thought you might "like" this quote because of its flawed logic:

"The evolutionary scientists who believe that man existed for over a million years have an almost insurmountable problem. Using the assumption of forty-three years for an average human generation, the population growth over a million years would produce 23,256 consecutive generations. We calculate the expected population by starting with one couple one million years ago and use the same assumptions of a forty-three-year generation and 2.5 children per family… The evolutionary theory of a million years of growth would produce trillions × trillions × trillions × trillions of people that should be alive today on our planet. To put this in perspective, this number is vastly greater than the total number of atoms in our vast universe"

I found this quoted in Ray Comfort's Scientific Facts in the Bible (p. 82), with the source identified as merely, Grant R. Jeffery, The Signature of God. I think the flaw in reasoning is obvious, but I'll gladly point it out if it isn't as obvious as I thought.

ShinySandshrew like this post!

Hey man how you been :d

Yay! That's what feminism is.

Well, your response was very eloquent. You actually took many points I wanted to say. Do you consider yourself a feminist too?

Just wanted to say that I LOVE your response in the Gender Double Standard thread.

Well, thanks much! I do want to point out, however, that the page actually said that plants postdate the Cambrian:

----------
3. Only some phyla appear in the Cambrian explosion. In particular, all plants postdate the Cambrian, and flowering plants, by far the dominant form of land life today, only appeared about 140 Mya (Brown 1999).
----------
Thanks again!

----------
(By the way, no, not every phylum developed at that point, just many of them. And there was already evidence of complex multicellular organisms by that time - the Cambrian explosion just resulted in more of them.)
----------
I was looking through the previous evolution debate a while back and I thought about asking you before, but only got around to it today. I genuinely want to know: what are the complex multicellular organisms of which you spoke?

I think it's a very interesting issue. Might start something on it soon(ish). Interesting to hear your take on it.

Oyyyyyy.

Re. the what is wrong thread.

I don't disagree with much of your last post (I genuinely couldn't believe the satire world thingy. I looked at the url without clicking and was just amazed at that man's stupidity).

However, interested by your views on gays/straights only hotels. Do you not think that private establishments should be allowed the right to admit only customers they wish to serve?(providing of course they make it clear prior to booking).

I would start a thread on it, may even do so in time, however my current sig prevents me doing so.

lol, ty. evidently the moderators don't think so, though. LOL

I'm reading through the What is "wrong" with gay people thread, and I have to say that you're posting some brilliant comments.
I am not gay -- my orientation is a bit more complicated than that -- but you have my respect and appreciation. =)

LOL I like your john lock sig. its so true

Ah. I see! I understand the point about wondering what career you'd choose after getting a biology degree. Well, let me ask you this about the video game aspect: would want to design a game or program a game? By design, I mean figure how the game would flow, how the story would proceed, how the characters should look. This kind of aspect would need some skill in animation, 2-D and 3-D design, and some knowledge of how to...write and plan a story! If you want to program games, let me tell you that you are in for a lot of work! The course that I just finished on the basics of programming has really opened my eyes to just how much programming goes into a video game.

And don't worry about not knowing what to go for. I didn't really know what I wanted to go for until about four months before I started. I know that you don't believe in this, but I'll be praying for you, J.T.!