ForumsWEPRWe're eating poison

79 8310
KnightDeclan
offline
KnightDeclan
479 posts
280

http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2013/06/17/gmo-global-alert-2yr-scientific-study-certifies-gmo-is-poison-cancer-causing/

The food companies are using pesticides that cause cancer. It's scientifically proven and it's horrible. Monsanto doesn't know what they're doing, and someone has to change it. Either shut them down, or make find a cleaner, and healthier way, to live.

  • 79 Replies
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,540 posts
2,210

Wise found out how much more logical religion was. But of course, yo don't have to be atheist to believe that frogs are amphibians, or iron is a mineral. There's a difference between earthly science and the crazy theories they think of which has thoughts and assumptions as proof, rather than solid proof.


You don't have to be atheist to accept the Big Bang (first proposed by a theist), Abiogenesis, or Evolution. They do discount certain literal interpretations of certain holy text. This isn't an attempt to do so, it just turned out that way. As Kasic said "they don't give a flying meatball whether religion is affected by what they say".
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,540 posts
2,210

Well, some illustrations and documents aren't enough to make me believe something against my religion.


What is enough for you to change your religious views? (At least on certain points.)
KnightDeclan
offline
KnightDeclan
479 posts
280

What is enough for you to change your religious views?
If you show me recorded text of someone who evolved from an ape. If you bring me back past 9000 years, I'll become an apostate. I don''t believe that the earth is any older than that.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,540 posts
2,210

If you show me recorded text of someone who evolved from an ape.


We still are apes. And that would be all recorded text since we all evolved on that linage.

would a 20-30,000 year old cave painting due?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/20%2C000_Year_Old_Cave_Paintings_Hyena.gif

Or a 60,000 year old writings on eggshlls?

http://johnmackinnon.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/oldest-writing.jpg

Now would you like an understanding of how we are able to date objects so old?
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

Just because i don't believe in a lot of anti-religious theories,

there is no such thing as a anti-religion theory.

there is not a single theory that has as purpose to be against religions. period.

I love Chemistry and Biology, it's very interesting

so you love biology and you think it's interesting.
yet, you completely deny the foundation of biology. and try every possible way to argue against this foundation.

i'm sorry but i deny the notion that you have ANY interest in biology AT ALL.
and if you really are. plz. stop being so ignored and get yourself more/better educated.

Wise found out how much more logical religion was.

no, kurt wise has choosen to be ignorant. and has choosen mare believe over actual facts.
he was able to choose this (unlike you) because he actually has learned about science. he did learn it and was able to set his own points of view aside. (unlike you) (so dont try to compare youself whit him. he is ignorant like you. but he is not close minded like you.

"even if all the evidence pointed to a Old Earth, [he] would still believe in a Young Earth" whit this he has thrown away all his credentials.
(if all the evidence pointed to a round earth he would still believe in a flat earth) it's just stupid...

btw if kurt wise has found religious logic... why doesn't he want to share it? ever since he stopped reading science he does not want to talk/debate whit atheists/scientists about this topic anymore...

is keeping everything secret a religious logic thing? or doesn't he want to enter such talk/debate because he knows that he is wrong, but doesn't like to me reminded how wrong he is.

There's a difference between earthly science and the crazy theories they think of which has thoughts and assumptions as proof, rather than solid proof.

so you are interested in biology but you say it has assumptions as proof rather then solid proof?

didn't you say you passed school whit everything on a 8 or higher?
i then asked you to explain to me the basic scientific rules that makes a hypothesis a theory.
as usually you didn't reply on it of course.
but you might not know it yourself but your stupidity gives away that all these things you say. are LIES.
you have no freaking idea what biology is. how can you say you love it and are interested in it? why do you lie all the time? it doesn't make you look any better.

I assume you think evolution, abiogenesis, etc. to be the thoughts and assumptions? Because if so...I do love satire

nice line. to bad it doesn't say anything about your opinion or doesn't it bring us any closer to the ground of your problem. (yes it's your problem. not ours. we are just trying to learn you something... why we try is anyone's guess. because your obviously not listening.

Well, some illustrations and documents aren't enough to make me believe something against my religion.

then explain to me why i should believe 1 single book to be the truth of everything? why is the document whit the name "bible" true and every other document false?
and why exactly the bible? why not the Qur'an for example?

I don''t believe that the earth is any older than that.

at least that 3000 year older then the bible tells you.

and why do you not need to same proof for adam and eve? or are you that snake? are you the root of all evil?

Now would you like an understanding of how we are able to date objects so old?

he is probably going to point out that carbon dating is not reliable.
so i hope you got a list of the other 50 ways to determine the age of a object ready =P
KnightDeclan
offline
KnightDeclan
479 posts
280

at least that 3000 year older then the bible tells you.
Why would you come to this conlusion?

and why do you not need to same proof for adam and eve? or are you that snake? are you the root of all evil?
Yes, I admit it, I'm Satan. Oh well, you got me.

Now would you like an understanding of how we are able to date objects so old?
Please explain. I've heard of may ways, but going by ratios of patterns and assumptions shouldn't prove something's age.

KnightDeclan
offline
KnightDeclan
479 posts
280

so you are interested in biology but you say it has assumptions as proof rather then solid proof?
Let me explain. Any study which i can come across myself, I believe in. But when Darwin comes up with crazy things like evolution, which I can't do myself, because it's just a theory, I don't believe it. There's no possible way to prove evolution. You can say this leads to that, but you can't prove how it relates to evolution. It's still just a theory. I was kicked out of public school when I was 10 for always denying things the teacher said about bullying, evolution, and slavery. These teachers are forcing theories and opinions down children's throats like they're facts. It's not right. They should be learning about plants, gases, math, astronomy, spelling, grammar, etc.

partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

Why would you come to this conlusion?

i'm not giving you more doctrine food. you had enough buddy.

Yes, I admit it, I'm Satan. Oh well, you got me.

gj dodging the actual question.
let's try again:
"and why do you not need to same proof for adam and eve?"

Any study which i can come across myself, I believe in. But when Darwin comes up with crazy things

and why exactly are you always right?

because it's just a theory, I don't believe it.

pfffff. how many times was the scientific method explained to you?
and if you really think that. then how in hell have you earned a 8 for science?
oh i know, because your school shouldn't be allowed to teach science.
if i knew what school it was i surely would try to take it down. they make a real mess out of good people.

They should be learning about plants, gases, math, astronomy, spelling, grammar, etc.

you said you dont believe in astronomy
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

shouldn't have said that about the school. it's you as you said youself. just a bit latter then my quote.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,540 posts
2,210

Please explain. I've heard of may ways, but going by ratios of patterns and assumptions shouldn't prove something's age.


So if I had a jar of jell beans sitting on a table and could confirm that one jelly bean was removed from the jar every minute while it sat on the table. I couldn't count the jelly beans in the jar and determine how long it has been sitting on the table?

This is basically what we are doing. But it's even better as we have multiple "jars" with all sorts of "candies" which we can cross reference.

analogy aside, one of the first points of evidence prior to radiometric dating came from the visual inspection of the geological layers. There are simply to many of them for the Earth to be so young.

because it's just a theory,


If it's a theory then with the right resources and know how you can repeat the findings.

Theory; A scientific explanation of related observations or events based on hypotheses and verified multiple times by different independent researchers.

I was kicked out of public school when I was 10 for always denying things the teacher said about bullying, evolution, and slavery.


This explains your incredibly poor education.

http://affordablehousinginstitute.org/blogs/us/wp-content/uploads/i_m_not_listening.jpg
pangtongshu
offline
pangtongshu
9,995 posts
3,285

I assume you think evolution, abiogenesis, etc. to be the thoughts and assumptions? Because if so...I do love satire

nice line. to bad it doesn't say anything about your opinion or doesn't it bring us any closer to the ground of your problem. (yes it's your problem. not ours. we are just trying to learn you something... why we try is anyone's guess. because your obviously not listening.


party..I said that =p

I think this just shows more so how KnightDeclan needs to start using the quote button instead of the italic one >_>

at least that 3000 year older then the bible tells you.
Why would you come to this conlusion?


Has the simple math behind it early on

But when Darwin comes up with crazy things like evolution, which I can't do myself,


We can see evolution happening

because it's just a theory,


No..a scientific theory. That is much different

These teachers are forcing theories and opinions down children's throats like they're facts.


Because they are facts
thisisnotanalt
offline
thisisnotanalt
9,837 posts
1,530

This explains your incredibly poor education.


yessss. bombs dropped shots fired. mage is tearing it up

Because they are facts


define fact (hint: try to avoid doing so in such a way that your belligerent exaggeration of the power of induction is retroactively excused or erased)

Let me explain. Any study which i can come across myself, I believe in. But when Darwin comes up with crazy things like evolution, which I can't do myself, because it's just a theory, I don't believe it. There's no possible way to prove evolution. You can say this leads to that, but you can't prove how it relates to evolution. It's still just a theory. I was kicked out of public school when I was 10 for always denying things the teacher said about bullying, evolution, and slavery. These teachers are forcing theories and opinions down children's throats like they're facts. It's not right. They should be learning about plants, gases, math, astronomy, spelling, grammar, etc.


my remarkable proof of the sentience of water, gleaned over diligent study which i led and conducted myself:

1. create a puddle of water on a surface. personalize the specifics to your liking

2. make sure the place where the water is is really boring and stupid for any age

3. put a bunch of cool things in the adjacent room (make sure you appeal to all ages; i personally was sure to include ice packs for old arthritic water, champagne for partygoing water, ice for baby water since babies love ice)

4. hours later, observe how the water has moved from the boring dumb puddle it was in (lame) to the cool room full of cool stuff (cool)

additional observation--the water has of its own free will gathered on the champagne and around the ice. water is obviously sentient and it loves to have fun
pangtongshu
offline
pangtongshu
9,995 posts
3,285

define fact


A thing that is indisputably the case.

(hint: try to avoid doing so in such a way that your belligerent exaggeration of the power of induction is retroactively excused or erased)


https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/4345199616/hCF25FBEF/
thisisnotanalt
offline
thisisnotanalt
9,837 posts
1,530

You used memes and memes are dead.

pangtongshu
offline
pangtongshu
9,995 posts
3,285
Showing 31-45 of 79