|
Post by maya55555 on Jul 6, 2017 3:15:22 GMT
proggy
Try not to get your knickers into a knot. Remember your incoherent thread from the other day?
Do what you do best. ![](https://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/boehner-drinky-photoshoop.png)
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jul 6, 2017 3:27:11 GMT
proggy
Try not to get your knickers into a knot. Remember your incoherent thread from the other day?
Do what you do best. ![](https://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/boehner-drinky-photoshoop.png)
How is it that you report people for insulting you, but you are comfortable posting this kind of stuff?
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Jul 6, 2017 4:42:16 GMT
gadreel
I do NOT always waste my time reporting every perceived insult. What I am stating about proggy was true by his own admission. Are you his MUM?
Well so much for your peace treaty, which you have breached.
Your quote.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Jul 6, 2017 4:45:55 GMT
gadreel
I do NOT always waste my time reporting every perceived insult. What I am stating about proggy was true by his own admission. Are you his MUM?
Well so much for your peace treaty, which you have breached. He simply asked you a question. You have to be pretty desperate to play the victim to find offence in what he posted.
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Jul 6, 2017 4:51:36 GMT
Coldcamcimes
Was I addressing you?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jul 6, 2017 8:52:03 GMT
That would all be wonderful news if you happen to be a goldfish.
The arguments for intelligent design in that video are over 50 years old. That is not to say they aren't good arguments, they are. They just have not been effective against popular opinion and the courts.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 6, 2017 10:32:58 GMT
proggy
Try not to get your knickers into a knot. Remember your incoherent thread from the other day?
Do what you do best. ![](https://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/boehner-drinky-photoshoop.png)
M, is that John Boehner? It sure as hell looks like him.
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on Jul 6, 2017 15:42:50 GMT
2) The universe is just right for life. This is absurd in at least two different ways. One - no, the universe is not just right for life. It is, in fact, almost completely hostile to life. Drop a life form (a person, say) into our universe in a spot chosen entirely at random. There is a 99.999999999999%+ chance that your person will be dead within sixty seconds or so. Right. And I bet most of the people that say "right for life" are really talking about Human life (since Humans are the bee's knees, apparently). You don't even have to leave our planet to see that the "right for life" statement is ridiculous since 80+% of Earth is hostile to Human life.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jul 6, 2017 18:07:29 GMT
tpfkar maya55555 said:bald can twin Rehashing pitifully childish wants does not make a "case". Since I've seen your posts, I know that is one of your many occupations. I do NOT read ErJen's threads, as we discuss our philosophies over the phone. I am surprised that you could not deduce that as a possibility.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jul 6, 2017 18:12:47 GMT
gadreel
I do NOT always waste my time reporting every perceived insult. What I am stating about proggy was true by his own admission. Are you his MUM?
Well so much for your peace treaty, which you have breached.
Your quote.
Please explain how my question insulted you.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jul 6, 2017 18:15:11 GMT
That would all be wonderful news if you happen to be a goldfish. The arguments for intelligent design in that video are over 50 years old. That is not to say they aren't good arguments, they are. They just have not been effective against popular opinion and the courts. They are NOT good arguments, they essentially boil down to the watchmaker which is an inductive argument, and was wrong from the second it was formulated.
|
|
|
Post by Cinemachinery on Jul 6, 2017 20:30:36 GMT
You didn't title the thread?
I bet it was your sister!
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Jul 6, 2017 22:05:35 GMT
Cine:
The meaning is essentially the same as the title of the video. Good to see you posting again.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jul 6, 2017 22:35:19 GMT
Cine:
The meaning is essentially the same as the title of the video. Good to see you posting again. Please explain how I insulted you.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Jul 6, 2017 22:50:53 GMT
Coldcamcimes
Was I addressing you? I think it's important to point it out to someone when they're behaving like a victim. I don't care who you were addressing, I don't need your permission to respond.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Jul 6, 2017 23:15:51 GMT
Okay, and another minute in they summarise their big evidence as : 1) The universe had a beginning. Depends on what you mean by "the universe". But possibly, sure. Not sure what this has to do with god, though. 2) The universe is just right for life. This is absurd in at least two different ways. One - no, the universe is not just right for life. It is, in fact, almost completely hostile to life. Drop a life form (a person, say) into our universe in a spot chosen entirely at random. There is a 99.999999999999%+ chance that your person will be dead within sixty seconds or so. Two - rather obviously, it is life that is "right" for the universe, not vice versa. 3) The "design" in DNA. This argument has been so thoroughly and completely debunked that simply stating it demonstrates that you are either utterly ignorant of the subject, or lying. So. What a waste of time. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that this video has fck all to do with cosmologists, since they appear to be talking about DNA.......
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jul 6, 2017 23:50:22 GMT
That would all be wonderful news if you happen to be a goldfish. The arguments for intelligent design in that video are over 50 years old. That is not to say they aren't good arguments, they are. They just have not been effective against popular opinion and the courts. They are NOT good arguments, they essentially boil down to the watchmaker which is an inductive argument, and was wrong from the second it was formulated. Hello, Maya? Are you there? See what I mean? See what gadreel said? They didn't listen 50 years ago, why should they suddenly start listening now?
|
|
|
Post by progressiveelement on Jul 7, 2017 0:11:15 GMT
proggy
Try not to get your knickers into a knot. Remember your incoherent thread from the other day?
Do what you do best. ![](https://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/boehner-drinky-photoshoop.png)
Which thread? I've been focusing on films and games mostly. Was it the God game one? Because that is a thing. 😉
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jul 7, 2017 1:07:34 GMT
They are NOT good arguments, they essentially boil down to the watchmaker which is an inductive argument, and was wrong from the second it was formulated. Hello, Maya? Are you there? See what I mean? See what gadreel said? They didn't listen 50 years ago, why should they suddenly start listening now? They did not listen 500 years ago when the argument was formulated, the argument is flawed.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 7, 2017 9:11:49 GMT
That would all be wonderful news if you happen to be a goldfish. The arguments for intelligent design in that video are over 50 years old. That is not to say they aren't good arguments, they are. They just have not been effective against popular opinion and the courts. Err... wouldn't a 'good argument' be one which was effective in exactly these sort of places?
|
|