Dawinists standing on the panic button.

[OrangeEmpire]

How is that any less likely than some magician in the sky cranking out a whole universe in 6 days? Don't act like you are smarter than me just because you buy the idea that I am doomed to eternal hell by a god that supposedly loves me.

And the next smartest animals are apes.

Whoa there big fella, why doesn't god love you?

 

[OrangeEmpire]

How is that any less likely than some magician in the sky cranking out a whole universe in 6 days? Don't act like you are smarter than me just because you buy the idea that I am doomed to eternal hell by a god that supposedly loves me.

And the next smartest animals are apes.

I thought it was dolphins.

Or humpback whales if you are in to star trek.

 

[thunder5]

You stated something as a fact...but not only was it not a fact the exact opposite (that the FBI refutes the 98% stat you mentioned) was a fact...

At issue here is ignorance and credibility...and all the petty insults and insinuations you can throw out won't change that you passionately embrace the former and...based on the way about 98% of the people in this forum respond to you...have very little of the latter

I'll put up my credibility against your naivete eight days a week.

I'm not trying to start anything, I'm just saying, if your only evidence is your word and some guy none of us know, then you can't expect anyone to believe you. When it comes to things like that and such far fetched claims, if you don't have some kind of accessible source, it's better to never throw them out there to begin with. It does nothing for your credibility.

Hmmm...one more person calling gs's credibility into question and we'll have what alot of people refer to as a pattern

 

[JZVOL]

How is that any less likely than some magician in the sky cranking out a whole universe in 6 days? Don't act like you are smarter than me just because you buy the idea that I am doomed to eternal hell by a god that supposedly loves me.

And the next smartest animals are apes.

Weak.

 

[gsvol]

Hmmm...one more person calling gs's credibility into question and we'll have what alot of people refer to as a pattern

You and emain make a real pair, I'll grant you that.

 

[rockytophigh]

How is that any less likely than some magician in the sky cranking out a whole universe in 6 days? Don't act like you are smarter than me just because you buy the idea that I am doomed to eternal hell by a god that supposedly loves me.

And the next smartest animals are apes.

weak.....sauce.

Fine, it's debatable which is considered smarter but ok, let's go with apes.

Men build you a road using elements from the earth to form a compact smooth surface, paint it to give symbolic rules to follow when driving your car on, that has thousands of intricate parts made by man, crank up your Sirrius which is broadcast from a sattelite in outer space, which was put there by man. Tune it to a show with men discussing apes and listen while you use these man made tools to get to the airport. Enjoy a man made movie about animals on your flight near the edge of space to travel to Africa. When you arrive, your next smartest animal will be picking fleas off one another and if your lucky, may sling some poop on you.

Naw, I'm not acting like I'm smarter....I'm just making you think.

I never said you were going to hell.....stop making stuff up and putting words in my mouth. If you agree that it makes perfect sense that we evolved from animals #1 or #2 or the gap isn't so stupidly huge....well.......:cray:

 

[gsvol]

Well, I certainly think he did, but other than a single line written by Flavius Josephus there is no written record outside of the Bible of him ever existing.

However, given the times and accuracy of places and historical events in the Bible, I'm sure a man named Jesus did walk the earth and was crucified by the Roman authority. There is certainly no evidence it didn't happen. Like I said, it is reasonable.

How about the resurrection?? Do you think it mere superstition for Christians to celebrate that event each year??

Saying there is a creator implies a single entity behind it all.

And saying there was a big bang implies there was an event behind it all.

 

[emainvol]

Weak.

It was more just a rip of George Carlin.

 

[emainvol]

weak.....sauce.

Fine, it's debatable which is considered smarter but ok, let's go with apes.

Men build you a road using elements from the earth to form a compact smooth surface, paint it to give symbolic rules to follow when driving your car on, that has thousands of intricate parts made by man, crank up your Sirrius which is broadcast from a sattelite in outer space, which was put there by man. Tune it to a show with men discussing apes and listen while you use these man made tools to get to the airport. Enjoy a man made movie about animals on your flight near the edge of space to travel to Africa. When you arrive, your next smartest animal will be picking fleas off one another and if your lucky, may sling some poop on you.

Naw, I'm not acting like I'm smarter....I'm just making you think.

I never said you were going to hell.....stop making stuff up and putting words in my mouth. If you agree that it makes perfect sense that we evolved from animals #1 or #2 or the gap isn't so stupidly huge....well.......:cray:

Because apes don't do anything smarter that throwing feces.

And that whole "I don't know what to tell you" line implies that I am helpless because I don't believe what you believe. You may not have explicitly claimed to be smarter than those of us who believe in evolutionary theory, but that's how it comes off when you use that language.

You are right though, you didn't say I was going to hell, I just used an example of what you were suggesting was a much more believable concept. It may be weak, but it's relevant.

 

[emainvol]

You and emain make a real pair, I'll grant you that.

I don't think we are the only two who have ever questioned your credibility.

Although for the record, that statement wasn't questioning your credibility, I just said that your unsubstantiated FBI claim did nothing for your credibility.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Really, I thought dolphins were next in line after humans?

 

[IPorange]

cephalopods and parrots are high up there.

 

[gsvol]

So we can assume you find all the Greek philosophers equally worthless given the time period they lived in?

The renaissance was sparked by renewed study of the Greek philosophers and other classic literature, certainly not by new age paganism, islamic studies, radical economic theory nor eastern mysticism as the current leftist liberalism movement would have us follow.

One of the best advancements of the renaissance was enabling the common man to speak out about whatever he chose.

Today's so-called 'avant guarde' liberal would do just the opposite.

I took a rather dim view of the internet to begin with but then one day I read an anonymous, untitled document that put forth the theory that today's internet would eventually lead to a modern day renaissance in that in modern times only government, big corporations and very wealthy people could get their ideas out for everyone to consider but with the advent of the internet anyone could be on equal footing and I think that is proving to be true.

(I wonder what RJ would have to say about Asclepius?)

 

[emainvol]

Really, I thought dolphins were next in line after humans?

nope

 

[OrangeEmpire]

what are the smartest animals? :: Nature :: USA WEEKEND Magazine

Hmmm...... #2 I smell some liberal/evolution bias.....

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Top 10 Smartest Animals: Creature Countdowns: Animal Planet

Some more bias.... I smell an agenda!

I would think Dolphins would be number one because they do not pick their own butt and then smell it....... oh wait..........

I guess that proves every thing!

 

[IPorange]

what are the smartest animals? :: Nature :: USA WEEKEND Magazine

Hmmm...... #2 I smell some liberal/evolution bias.....

Also the bias of our own condition. We are more likely to find evidence of intelligence with animals we can relate to, and are "attractive" to us. All things even, cephalopods have demonstrated more impressive problem-solving skills than any other animal in my opinion. But because they aren't very social and don't care for their young, we count that against them. They are just so different we have a hard time evaluating them fairly.

 

[T-TownVol]

Also the bias of our own condition. We are more likely to find evidence of intelligence with animals we can relate to, and are "attractive" to us. All things even, cephalopods have demonstrated more impressive problem-solving skills than any other animal in my opinion. But because they aren't very social and don't care for their young, we count that against them. They are just so different we have a hard time evaluating them fairly.

Way to represent :clapping:

 

[rockytophigh]

Because apes don't do anything smarter that throwing feces.

And that whole "I don't know what to tell you" line implies that I am helpless because I don't believe what you believe. You may not have explicitly claimed to be smarter than those of us who believe in evolutionary theory, but that's how it comes off when you use that language.

You are right though, you didn't say I was going to hell, I just used an example of what you were suggesting was a much more believable concept. It may be weak, but it's relevant.

the slinging poop reference was a bit of sarcasm....but in comparison to humans it's similar to comparing the difference in an ape & a protozoan. While apes & dolphins are very bright and smart animals....the gap between humans and those two are a bazillion times greater, IMO. It's just my opinion, & I was just trying to get you to think. I'm not better, smarter, more talented, taller, etc. than anyone on here....but I can certainly see the ginormous, lol, gap between human capability of launching rockets, building space stations & putting them in orbit, or even something as simple as a aluminum fishing boat.....think how much goes into building a john boat with a 5 hp motor!!! You have to mine the ore, refine it, engineer the boat form, r & d, form it, weld it, reinforce it.....& that doesn't count the motor! While I appreciate the importance of a chimp recognizing itself in a mirror, I find it difficult to ignore the HUGE differences.

 

[volinbham]

Penn and Teller took it to the Dolphin are the "next smartest" concept.

Here's a bit - quite entertaining but language warning.

Penn & Teller BS: Dolphins 2/3

 

[IPorange]

I've seen that before. My favorite part is when the hippy guy, when asked if he was worried about complications with his child's delivery with dolphins (you'd have to watch the clip), he says that if there were any complications, because she is in the water the dolphins may be able to correct those complications and help.

:crazy:

I have met a pair of dolphins. They are no more intelligent than a German Shepard. That's pretty good for an animal, but still...

 

[gsvol]

I don't think we are the only two who have ever questioned your credibility.

Although for the record, that statement wasn't questioning your credibility, I just said that your unsubstantiated FBI claim did nothing for your credibility.

But you two are the quickest to go there at every opportunity.

The FBI had a radical makeover during the Clinton administration.

I know a guy who from the age of six at least wanted to be an FBI agent, and he did and not only that he had the prestigious posting to the White House Presidential liaison office, that is until Clinton.

Clinton had those guys removed from the White House and quartered in a dilapidated old federal building blocks away from the White House by ten AM his first day in office and had little if any contact with them for his eight years in office.

"The problem was with Bill Clinton -- the scandals and the rumored scandals, the incubating ones and the dying ones never ended. Whatever moral compass the president was consulting was leading him in the wrong direction. His closets were full of skeletons just waiting to burst out."
Loius Freeh, former FBI Director.

Freeh wasn't just any FBI director but was appointed by Clinton himself and also was the first FBI director that wasn't promoted from within the agency, he was a Justice Departement lawyer. (although he had at one time been an FBI agent.)

(one of the things that really pissed me off was that Clinton wouldn't let the FBI question the Khobar Tower bombers in Saudi Arabia, since I am a USAF veteran.)

Clinton had little to do with Freeh, preferring to deal with him through Reno and Holder in the Justice Dept which has authority over the FBI, including it's director.

Not only that Clinton didn't have much to do with the CIA, it's director once answered a reporters question about his discussions with the president and he remarked; "I don't know, I haven't seen him in three or four months."

A CIA director also testified before a congressional hearing on the OKC bombing, words to the effect that the investigation was botched and was ended long before it should have been.

The FBI has included mere words – “insults” and “intimidation” – in calculating “hate crimes” statistics and – under the current political regime in Washington – there’s every reason to believe they’ll subjectively consider “insults” and “intimidation” (read: traditional sexual morality) for purposes of prosecuting “hate crimes.”

Yes, it’s a brave new world and with H.R. 1913 – among other things – a once free America has moved, both literally and figuratively, a quarter of a century beyond Orwell’s 1984.

PS; I could care less whether You, Blamie and/or anyone else believes me or not, that's my business. The fact is I know what I'm talking about, whether you do or not.

PPS; Another tidbit, believe it or not, the man in charge for a long time, of the final training and evaluation of all federal investigation trainees was an alumnus of the University of Tennessee at Knoxville.

PPPS; Your darwinian theory has too many gaps and holes in it to be very credible either. Let's say it isn't credible enough to be taught to grammar school kids as fact, no matter how passionately you may argue.

 

[emainvol]

the slinging poop reference was a bit of sarcasm....but in comparison to humans it's similar to comparing the difference in an ape & a protozoan. While apes & dolphins are very bright and smart animals....the gap between humans and those two are a bazillion times greater, IMO. It's just my opinion, & I was just trying to get you to think. I'm not better, smarter, more talented, taller, etc. than anyone on here....but I can certainly see the ginormous, lol, gap between human capability of launching rockets, building space stations & putting them in orbit, or even something as simple as a aluminum fishing boat.....think how much goes into building a john boat with a 5 hp motor!!! You have to mine the ore, refine it, engineer the boat form, r & d, form it, weld it, reinforce it.....& that doesn't count the motor! While I appreciate the importance of a chimp recognizing itself in a mirror, I find it difficult to ignore the HUGE differences.

fair enough.

 

[emainvol]

But you two are the quickest to go there at every opportunity.

The FBI had a radical makeover during the Clinton administration.

I know a guy who from the age of six at least wanted to be an FBI agent, and he did and not only that he had the prestigious posting to the White House Presidential liaison office, that is until Clinton.

Clinton had those guys removed from the White House and quartered in a dilapidated old federal building blocks away from the White House by ten AM his first day in office and had little if any contact with them for his eight years in office.



Freeh wasn't just any FBI director but was appointed by Clinton himself and also was the first FBI director that wasn't promoted from within the agency, he was a Justice Departement lawyer. (although he had at one time been an FBI agent.)

(one of the things that really pissed me off was that Clinton wouldn't let the FBI question the Khobar Tower bombers in Saudi Arabia, since I am a USAF veteran.)

Clinton had little to do with Freeh, preferring to deal with him through Reno and Holder in the Justice Dept which has authority over the FBI, including it's director.

Not only that Clinton didn't have much to do with the CIA, it's director once answered a reporters question about his discussions with the president and he remarked; "I don't know, I haven't seen him in three or four months."

A CIA director also testified before a congressional hearing on the OKC bombing, words to the effect that the investigation was botched and was ended long before it should have been.

The FBI has included mere words – “insults” and “intimidation” – in calculating “hate crimes” statistics and – under the current political regime in Washington – there’s every reason to believe they’ll subjectively consider “insults” and “intimidation” (read: traditional sexual morality) for purposes of prosecuting “hate crimes.”

Yes, it’s a brave new world and with H.R. 1913 – among other things – a once free America has moved, both literally and figuratively, a quarter of a century beyond Orwell’s 1984.

PS; I could care less whether You, Blamie and/or anyone else believes me or not, that's my business. The fact is I know what I'm talking about, whether you do or not.

PPS; Another tidbit, believe it or not, the man in charge for a long time, of the final training and evaluation of all federal investigation trainees was an alumnus of the University of Tennessee at Knoxville.

PPPS; Your darwinian theory has too many gaps and holes in it to be very credible either. Let's say it isn't credible enough to be taught to grammar school kids as fact, no matter how passionately you may argue.

1) You can say that all you want to. There aren't too many people on here that will buy that just because you say so.

2) I never said it should be taught as fact.

 

[red butler]

Maybe, but I am not going to give near as much credence to bronze age people that were living in superstitious times as I am Darwin and others. The authors of the Bible didn't know a fraction of what we know now in terms of the cosmos and physical world.

That's true and I have as hard a time as anyone believing the Old Testament word for word. However, if Darwin knew the complexity of a single cell, even he would probably reconsider his theory of evolution (he was quoted as having trouble reconciling the complexity of the human eye). During Darwin's time, his answer for no proof of a "cross species" in the fossil record was that there would eventually be proof. Many years later with a greatly expanded fossil record and we are no closer to any proof that one species has ever evolved into another species.

Einstein could not admit to himself that the universe was expanding until it was mathmatically proven otherwise. The reason he had trouble with the universe expanding in all directions, is that when you rewind through time ... at some point there was a creation.

Going back to the complexity of a cell, I find the theory of irreducible complexity interesting. Simply put, when eliminating parts of every machine there is a point where eliminating any pieces will render it useless. Consider the basic mousetrap. If you take away any of it's pieces, it no longer works. The cell is an amazing machine that replicates thousands of pieces of information (DNA) with amazing precision and efficiency. If one of those pieces of information is replicated in the wrong sequence it would be the equivalent of the "blue screen of death" on a computer. Yet the simple cell does this thousands if not millions of times per day. With this knowledge of the cell, it is inconceivable that a major random change to a species DNA could successfully change an organism into a new species.

Like I said, I have as much trouble as anyone else believing the old testament word for word... but I am convinced the theory of evolution is garbage.