Theist tries to tell atheists what they believe

Yes... an if all the simpler possibilities had been thoroughly researched an ruled out... an the only thang left was Jesus... would you then bow down an praize you'r Lord an Savior.???
 
cluelusshusbund said:
Yes... an if all the simpler possibilities had been thoroughly researched an ruled out... an the only thang left was Jesus... would you then bow down an praize you'r Lord an Savior.???
Click to expand...
Even if we accepted it was (a guy claiming to be) Jesus who could actually walk on water, why would that cause anyone to bow down and praise him, let alone call him a savior?

My first reaction would be to take him aside and say "What'll you get a load of what they've been saying about you after your death!" And then I would take him to see a matinee of "Life of Brian".
 
Never had any reason to believe in any god or gods, and that hasn't changed despite the relentless cacophony of people condemning me to Hell for not falling for the drivel they wallow in.
 
James R said:
Trek:

This post of yours was reported.

It is off-topic for the current thread. If you want to pit your Creationism against the theory of evolution, that's fine, but please take it to a different thread. You might also like to read some of the prior debates we have had about that particular topic on sciforums, so you don't repeat the same mistakes that (many) other Creationists have made.
Click to expand...
This post wasn’t against Darwinism.
It was against the claim of magic.
I think you falsely banned me
 
Trek:

Welcome back.
Trek said:
This post wasn’t against Darwinism.
It was against the claim of magic.
Click to expand...
Either way, it's off topic for this thread.
Trek said:
I think you falsely banned me
Click to expand...
I didn't ban you. I issued you with an official warning. You were banned because you have accumulated a number of previous warnings and you had enough active warning points to trigger an automatic temporary ban. I also let you off with a friendly warning on another matter, because I'm a nice guy and issuing you with more points would have extended your ban time unreasonably, in my judgment.

I already explain most of this back in post #588, above. Perhaps you haven't caught up with that yet.

Since you have decided to make this an issue, I publish the warning I gave you here. Readers can judge for themselves whether I warned you for illegitimate reasons. Here's the text of the explanatory message you were sent:

Your post was reported.

You repeated accused DaveC of lying, based on nothing more than your own guesswork about what you imagine his inner thoughts and motivations are.

Then, here, you complain about DaveC making *ad hominem* attacks on you.

It is obviously hypocritical of you to accuse him of that, when you started the whole ad hominem thing with him.

Stop trying to troll him, please. And don't be a hypocrite.

This warning carries 10 warning points.
Click to expand...
The following message was also appended to the reported post:
Repeatedly accusing another member of lying, then complaining of *ad hominem* attacks by the same user after having made a baseless *ad hominem* attack repeatedly is both hypocritical and inappropriate. Don't do this.
Click to expand...
If you want to discuss this further, please send me a message in the warning discussion thread. Or, if you prefer to make a public spectacle of yourself, feel free to start a thread in Site Feedback or Open Government.

I suggest that it might be more productive for you to come to terms with your ban, which is now in the past, and try to discuss the thread topic. I posted an interesting reply to the vaguely on-topic stuff you wrote. Maybe you'd like to reply to that? It's post number 587, which I assume you also haven't read yet, given that you missed 588.
 
Last edited:
Trek said:
I think you falsely banned me
Click to expand...
Nope, you kept repeating the same creationist nonsense and were rightly reported.
(Cell from goo or some other idiotic garbage)
You also had the audacity to claim that "the exquisite design of the cell," was evidence of a god.
Seriously? Is your memory that short or are you just a liar?

I asked you five? Six times to tell me which image was a cell (designed according to you) and salt crystals on another thread.
Not only did you fail to get the correct answer you did not even ATTEMPT to answer.
You promptly ran away when pressed.

Do you expect anyone on here to take you seriously after that?
 
Looks like Trek has ran away again.

So just to remind you Trek if you do come back:


There are posters on here who understand science and have made efforts to read about the import milestones.
There are posters who remember the stupid nonsense you have posted in the ID thread, the lies, trolling, pretending not to understand, failing to answer questions.
You repeated some of that in this thread which was called out so you ran away.

Your call.
 
James R said:
Either way, it's off topic for this thread.
Click to expand...
Then you should deduct points from the poster that brought up the subject of magic.
Otherwise you come across as biased and intolerant of people who believe differently to yourself
James R said:
I didn't ban you. I issued you with an official warning. You were banned because you have accumulated a number of previous warnings and you had enough active warning points to trigger an automatic temporary ban. I also let you off with a friendly warning on another matter, because I'm a nice guy and issuing you with more points would have extended your ban time unreasonably, in my judgment.
Click to expand...
I’m not if the same opinion.
I don’t think you had any cause to penalise me other than you personally don’t like wglhat I’m saying, and how I’m saying it. I think you are heavily passive-aggressive
James R said:
I suggest that it might be more productive for you to come to terms with your ban, which is now in the past, and try to discuss the thread topic. I posted an interesting reply to the vaguely on-topic stuff you wrote.
Click to expand...
I already know what to expect from the type of atheists that frequent in religious threads. Maybe y’all should tone down in the sensitivity. You may even learn something
James R said:
Since you have decided to make this an issue, I publish the warning I gave you here. Readers can judge for themselves whether I warned you for illegitimate reasons. Here's the text of the explanatory message you were sent:
Click to expand...
Don’t worry about it.
I know “hurting atheist feelings” is an offence in their coo-coo for coco-puff world.
 
Pinball1970 said:
Nope, you kept repeating the same creationist nonsense and were rightly reported.
Click to expand...
While “creationsists” may state the glaring obvious. I assure you I copied of no one.
Pinball1970 said:
Cell from goo or some other idiotic garbage)
You also had the audacity to claim that "the exquisite design of the cell," was evidence of a god.
Seriously? Is your memory that short or are you just a liar?
Click to expand...
lol!! Goo, primordial ocean, what’s the
difference?

Were you there?
Tell me what you actually know regarding the myth of the first cell :D

The idea of the cell being a product of a creator is way more plausible than the notion of goo or ocean (you decide) randomly putting all the bits I mentioned together. Sorry buddy. It’s just the way the cookie crumbles
Pinball1970 said:
I asked you five? Six times to tell me which image was a cell (designed according to you) and salt crystals on another thread.
Click to expand...
So what if you did?
What does it change?
I asked you to show where ID was taught in schools as a way to teach religion. We looked over that document you kept bringing up and there was nothing that said they wanted to teach religion, or use ID as a Trojan horse to teach religion.
Pinball1970 said:
Not only did you fail to get the correct answer you did not even ATTEMPT to answer.
You promptly ran away when pressed.
Click to expand...
I aske what the point was and how it impacted on what I was saying a few times and got nothing. So stop with your obfuscation.
Pinball1970 said:
Do you expect anyone on here to take you seriously after that?
Click to expand...
I dont really expect anything serious at all. Especially with threads like these. But I do hold out some hope that one of you will decide to have a proper discussion without cry-babying to the moderator
 
Trek said:
While “creationsists” may state the glaring obvious
Click to expand...
That's why creationist "science" is garbage, "its obvious" is as infantile an argument as you can get and also based on a lie. Evolution disproves the creation myth, that is is why you rage against it even though you have absolutely zero training in life sciences. You have zero interest in the science, just a desperate attempt to preserve your myth.
 
Trek said:
lol!! Goo, primordial ocean, what’s the
difference?
Click to expand...
Because the literature and text books does not talk about Abiogenesis like a six year old. STOP misrepresenting science this way.


Trek said:
So what if you did?
What does it change?
Click to expand...

Because that was your claim can't you follow an argument? For even one or two posts?

If course you can, you just pretend you can't like a liar and troll. Reported for lying, Again and trolling AGAIN.
 
Pinball1970 said:
Evolution disproves the creation myth, that is is why you rage against it even though you have absolutely zero training in life sciences.
Click to expand...
Ah good!
A claim you should be able to back up
Explain how “Darwinism” disproves “creationism”?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top