Creation questions

[synthesizer-patel]

and further I know how you think so I have skipped a step and did not even bother to present my source because I know you will not see it as credible and you have every right to think and believe what ever you please.

If you knew ahead of time that no one would take your sources seriously, why did you even bother to make the claim?

 

[Jason.Marshall]

If you knew ahead of time that no one would take your sources seriously, why did you even bother to make the claim?

Ask yourself these questions "was I talking to you"? by the way have I ever spoken to you before? do I know you? actually who are you? don't respond if you don't realised these are rhetorical statements.

 

[synthesizer-patel]

Ask yourself this question "was I talking to you"?

Yes - you posted in a public forum

 

[billvon]

So is it your claim that "Megaladons"[sic] are currently biting large ships in half?

 

[Dywyddyr]

like I said Bells I seen it on the discovery channel why bother using that as evidence when I know you would regard it as how do you all say it "Bollocks" yes Bollocks.

Well yeah.
And do you why Bells would dismiss it as bollocks?
Because it IS bollocks.
The Discovery Channel has all but admitted that the most of its Shark Week "documentaries" were somewhat less than entirely factual, and, in particular, the Megalodon episode stated at the beginning and ending indicating that it [wa]s fictional.

I already know you will not accept this as evidence which you are completely in your rights as a human being to do so, so please give me the same respect as I am giving you. and yeah I find you really entertaining please give me some of that unlimited resource of energy you have you are a dear.

Using a fictional TV programme as "evidence" isn't according ANYONE respect.

first of all I was not talking to you are any member it was an "a anb b" conversation why not "c" your way out of it?

It's a public forum - anyone can read read and reply to any post.

If I choose to belief something that does not make me a liar.

It makes you either a liar or seriously deluded (and less than rationally critical) - you pick which.

Those watching the “documentary,” however, were not burdened with such inconvenient truths. Instead, Discovery hired actors to play marine biologists on a hunt for the megalodon around the coast of South Africa. Their expedition is mounted following the release of (faked) footage showing a fishing vessel taken down by a massive sea-dwelling predator (nicknamed “submarine”).

 

[Jason.Marshall]

So is it your claim that "Megaladons"[sic] are currently biting large ships in half?

Its my opinion I am entitled to it I never once said you have to believe me I don't enjoy arguing about beliefs like I said its my belief I have not as yet confirmed my suspions its not rocket science I feel am talking to children.

 

[Jason.Marshall]

Well yeah.
And do you why Bells would dismiss it as bollocks?
Because it IS bollocks.
The Discovery Channel has all but admitted that the most of its Shark Week "documentaries" were somewhat less than entirely factual, and, in particular, the Megalodon episode stated at the beginning and ending indicating that it [wa]s fictional.


Using a fictional TV programme as "evidence" isn't according ANYONE respect.


It's a public forum - anyone can read read and reply to any post.


It makes you either a liar or seriously deluded (and less than rationally critical) - you pick which.

Those watching the “documentary,” however, were not burdened with such inconvenient truths. Instead, Discovery hired actors to play marine biologists on a hunt for the megalodon around the coast of South Africa. Their expedition is mounted following the release of (faked) footage showing a fishing vessel taken down by a massive sea-dwelling predator (nicknamed “submarine”).

Well am happy to be deluded whats your point, did I ever once tell you to belief me or did I once tell you to take my opinions as fact?

 

[billvon]

Its my opinion I am entitled to it

You certainly are entitled to whatever opinion you want to espouse.

I just wanted to verify that you are claiming that "Megaladons" (I assume that's a typo and you meant Megalodons) are biting ships in half, and that you are basing that on a fictional TV show that depicted a Megalodon biting a ship in half.

(If that's the case, whatever you do, do NOT watch the movie Jurassic Park!)

 

[Jason.Marshall]

You certainly are entitled to whatever opinion you want to espouse.

I just wanted to verify that you are claiming that "Megaladons" (I assume that's a typo and you meant Megalodons) are biting ships in half, and that you are basing that on a fictional TV show that depicted a Megalodon biting a ship in half.

(If that's the case, whatever you do, do NOT watch the movie Jurassic Park!)

See there you go you are an intelligent one it seems and am not being sarcastic I read your posts.

 

[Dywyddyr]

whats your point

There are, at the very least, TWO points.
1) There is NO evidence for your claim.
2) Your claimed source is SELF-ADMITTED FICTION.

Essentially you are therefore claiming to be - and claiming the "right" to continue being - a gullible oik.

 

[Jason.Marshall]

There are, at the very least, TWO points.
1) There is NO evidence for your claim.
2) Your claimed source is SELF-ADMITTED FICTION.

Essentially you are therefore claiming to be - and claiming the "right" to continue being - a gullible oik.

Then I am as well happy to be gullible again whats your point its my lif not yours

There are, at the very least, TWO points.
1) There is NO evidence for your claim.
2) Your claimed source is SELF-ADMITTED FICTION.

Essentially you are therefore claiming to be - and claiming the "right" to continue being - a gullible oik.

So again I am happy to be gullible again whats your point? its my life not yours unless my beliefs have a physical affect on you does it?

 

[Bells]

like I said Bells I seen it on the discovery channel

Which was fake.

why bother using that as evidence when I know you would regard it as how do you all say it "Bollocks" yes Bollocks...

Which begs the question.. Why did you make such a claim about something that was clearly fake and had been outed by all and sundry as being fake, and you tried to pass it off as fact?

Megalodons are extinct creatures. Discovery was outed as simply faking it during shark week. There is no evidence that they exist and certainly no evidence that they are snapping solid steel ships in half. And you have admitted that you made a claim that you knew would be seen as "bollocks".

lol but if you really want to know so bad I watched the the documentary on the "Megaladons" and I already know you will not accept this as evidence which you are completely in your rights as a human being to do so, so please give me the same respect as I am giving you. and yeah I find you really entertaining please give me some of that unlimited resource of energy you have you are a dear.

The issue is not that you watched it, but that you tried to use it in this thread about creationism, in response to questions which alluded to whether dinosaurs and humans coexisted.

It was dishonest. Hence why I asked you to provide evidence of your claims or admit you were being dishonest.

I am going to give you a piece of advice Jason.Marshall. Being gullible is not an excuse that you can claim at present. You admitted you knew everyone here would see it as bollocks and that you had no evidence to support your claims, despite saying that such evidence exists, just as you knew there was no evidence that they were snapping solid steel ships in half. This may be the religion forum, but that does not mean that you can spout stupid stuff like this and pass it off as fact and then retreat to personal belief when challenged. It does not work that way. Especially when you are trying to mix science and religion together to form the bastard child you gave birth to in this thread.

You have told us where you got it from, so I won't ban you. But next time you try and pull a stunt like this, I won't give you as many chances as you received this time. In fact, next time it will be zero chance and zero tolerance. If you are going to make such ridiculous claims that you know to be false, like that of humans are coexisting with prehistoric creatures and that they are snapping ships in half in the present, then you had damn be able to support it or you will be immediately moderated.

 

[Dywyddyr]

its my life not yours unless my beliefs have a physical affect on you does it?

It has an effect when you post bollocks and lies.
This is a science forum, not a platform for deluded nutcases to air their entirely unsupported drivel.

 

[Dywyddyr]

then you had damn be able to support it or you will be immediately moderated.

Oh for Eris' sake, just kill him now.

 

[Jason.Marshall]

Which was fake.


Which begs the question.. Why did you make such a claim about something that was clearly fake and had been outed by all and sundry as being fake, and you tried to pass it off as fact?

Megalodons are extinct creatures. Discovery was outed as simply faking it during shark week. There is no evidence that they exist and certainly no evidence that they are snapping solid steel ships in half. And you have admitted that you made a claim that you knew would be seen as "bollocks".


The issue is not that you watched it, but that you tried to use it in this thread about creationism, in response to questions which alluded to whether dinosaurs and humans coexisted.

It was dishonest. Hence why I asked you to provide evidence of your claims or admit you were being dishonest.

I am going to give you a piece of advice Jason.Marshall. Being gullible is not an excuse that you can claim at present. You admitted you knew everyone here would see it as bollocks and that you had no evidence to support your claims, despite saying that such evidence exists, just as you knew there was no evidence that they were snapping solid steel ships in half. This may be the religion forum, but that does not mean that you can spout stupid stuff like this and pass it off as fact and then retreat to personal belief when challenged. It does not work that way. Especially when you are trying to mix science and religion together to form the bastard child you gave birth to in this thread.

You have told us where you got it from, so I won't ban you. But next time you try and pull a stunt like this, I won't give you as many chances as you received this time. In fact, next time it will be zero chance and zero tolerance. If you are going to make such ridiculous claims that you know to be false, like that of humans are coexisting with prehistoric creatures and that they are snapping ships in half in the present, then you had damn be able to support it or you will be immediately moderated.

Yes your highness but again you do not have all the answers, all you have is beliefs just as I do when you have explored 100 percent of the oceans yourself then I will begin to take your beliefs serious because until then your naysayer attitude is just as much a belief as my lack of evidence which I claim to believe for personal reasons and I have ever right just as you do.

 

[Jason.Marshall]

Oh for Eris' sake, just kill him now.

lol...I still have much love for you, and still believe you are a kind and gentle soul.

 

[Jason.Marshall]

It has an effect when you post bollocks and lies.
This is a science forum, not a platform for deluded nutcases to air their entirely unsupported drivel.

I assumed scientist know better if you think my beliefs are lies then don't believe them aren't you not the expert?

 

[Kittamaru]

Jason.Marshall - either provide evidence to back your claims or retract them. It is as simple as that. It has nothing to do with the sub-forum you are in, but rather is a basic rule of this forum:

http://www.sciforums.com/threads/sciforums-site-rules.142880/

Posting and moderation
Posting on sciforums is a privilege, not a right. All material published on sciforums is at the discretion of the moderator team. Moderation may include editing, moving or deletion of posts or threads. Moderator actions are usually documented in some way, though members may not be contacted personally. The forum rules and guidelines are enforced at the discretion of the moderators. Sciforums is moderated bearing in mind the stated aims and ethos of the forum; we will not be bound by the letter of the rules as written, but by the spirit of the rules.

When posting:

• Start new threads in the appropriate subforum.
• Do not cross-post.
• Post on-topic. Avoid going off on a tangent - if you have to, start a new thread.
• Post personal information at your own risk.
• Be aware that you may be held legally liable for material you post.
• Be aware that your posts may remain on sciforums for years to come.
• Post clearly and coherently.
• Support your arguments with evidence.
• Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.
• Avoid logical fallacies.
• Do not breach copyright laws.
• Do not post private messages to the public forums.
• Do not expect members to do your homework for you.

Additionally:

Behaviour that may get you banned

• Personal attacks on another member, including name-calling.
• Threats.
• Stalking.
• Flaming.
• Hate speech.
• Posting another member's private information without explicit consent.
• Posting gratuitous comments or images of an obscene, sexual, violent or graphic nature.
• Excessive profanity.
• Repeated off-topic posting.
• Plagiarism.
• Knowingly posting false or misleading information.
• Spamming or advertising.
• Posting on behalf of a banned member.
• Trolling.
• Repetitive or vexatious posting.
• Interfering with moderation.
• Propaganda, preaching, proselytising or evangelising.
• Being a repeat-offending drain on moderator time and effort.

So... this is, quite simply, a case of put up or shut up

 

[Dywyddyr]

I assumed scientist know better if you think my beliefs are lies then don't believe them aren't you not the expert?

Your beliefs are UNSUPPORTED.
Your claimed evidence does not exist.
You belief is predicated on nothing (except, possibly, ignorance).

One doesn't need to be an expert - that which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.

 

[billvon]

Jason.Marshall - either provide evidence to back your claims or retract them.

Can't believe I am doing this, but in his defense, he did post evidence to back them up - his belief that a fictional show about Megalodons was real. Foolish? Certainly - but not the same as refusing to post evidence.