Satann Coulter
- Started
- Last post
- 261 Responses
- flagellum0
Mimio, are you content with a link battle now? Shall I link the countless papers which demonstrate the errors of Darwinism?
- Mimio0
Please don't. I wouldn't want you to crash the Church's website. :(
- mrdobolina0
hahahaha
Ask him why he thinks James Dobson is a proponent of ID.
- jevad0
I've run out of steam and teh will to argue with a brick wall
- pavlovs_dog0
I've said it before I.D. is absolute anti-science...
The scientfic meathod makes POSITIVE observations about the world around us...
I.D. makes only NEGATIVE claims. They have ZERO evidence...
It's as ture as the sky is blue.
And rember the head of ONE BILLION catholics accepts evolution ,and a 10 billion year old universe...
Why? Cause the vatican has a fucking astronomer! All flaggelate has is some unicorns told to to start fires fundie bullshit.
Discipler BELIEVES 'cause he (she?) wants too.
That's it.
- flagellum0
ah, ad hominem again. ;) Not going to win anyone to your position that way, mimio.
Just the facts please.
- kyl30
james dobson, was't he the host of family feud
- mrdobolina0
he's right about the pope. pavlov, I think we are both on ignore.
What a fucking puss.
- pavlovs_dog0
and i think man coulter is laughing her way to the bank fucking with yous...
- flagellum0
pavlov, may want to stick to things that you know something about.
I.D. makes positive observations. It positively identifies biological systems as the product of design, not blind natural mechanisms.
Take issue with that statement? Explain why and support your answer.
Next.
- pavlovs_dog0
he's right about the pope. pavlov, I think we are both on ignore.
What a fucking puss.
mrdobolina
(Jun 15 06, 13:42)i could give a fuck abbout one limp wristed fundy goof...
lies have a way of spreading though.
- johndiggity0
you speak as though intelligent design is fact, but it's not even a theory. no one has successfully postulated it as they have with the theory of evolution.
if it's so correct, why hasn't the scientific community validated it? why has m-theory, which propses that we are just a fucking random bubble of chance floating in an infinite sea of multiverses received more accreditation in the scientific community than intelligent deisgn?
- Mimio0
C'mon it was funny Discipler. Besides, my point is valid, ID dissipates into philosophy as soon as you try to establish origins. Which by the way is that same reason why you claim (over and over again) that Evolutionary theory is invalid. (i.e. it's not presently able to explain abiogenesis)
- Gilt0010
"that woman is a sensationalist and LOVES to rub people up the wrong way. "
Does anyone else see the irony in Jevad making that statement.
...
Question02
(Jun 13 06, 21:40)
-----------------------------
No I don't see anything ironic there. Jevad quite assuredly isn't a woman. Neither does he speak out to people nationally in order to make capital gains from his knee jerk statements.Quit using your "anyone see the irony?" clause. If you want to fence yourself off, put us all on ignore. It'd be a much more peaceful resolution.
- flagellum0
Oh and also explain what the scientific method is and how the extrapolation by Darwinists of unobserved macroevolution fits with the scientific method.
Again, support your answer, Pavlov.
- Mimio0
Right dobs, Phillip E. Johnson, Michael Behe, William Dembski, Stephen C. Meyer all the leading ID guys are Christians.
- pavlovs_dog0
I.D. makes positive observations. It positively identifies biological systems as the product of design, not blind natural mechanisms.
Talking loud, saying nothing.
-James Brown
YOU ONLY STATED THERE WAS POSITVE EVIDENCE IN ID, BUT NEGLECTED TO INCLUDE ANY JACKASS.
- flagellum0
Mimio, ID is the perfect explanation for causation. It explains what Darwinism could never explain. Namely the origin of complex specified information.
Think: Front-loaded uber-cell. Programmed to unfold at given intervals.
