The Cosmos: Created , not by chance.

I tried to talk to Paeshrus on AIM (he is listed as P Ashley if you want to say, “Hi!”) and he didn’t want to talk to me off the board. As such, I put my reply here, even though it is off-topic:

Well, let’s see here…

First of all, UU has been around for hundreds of years, and has three million plus members. If you do not know of the church, I would say this is due to your own ignorance. If you would like to know more about the church and it’s history, I have some links I could provide.

If this is a dig at the church, I respond with the following:

When the Protestants were breaking free from the Catholic church, the RCC was against it because they thought it would just lead to a splintering of the Gospel which would continue to create divisions.

The result is over 20,000 Protestant denominations in that time.

I would sumbit, then, that your churches and idealology are lacking the organization, not the UU’s, who in fact were once two churches who saw that they had much in common and GOT TOGETHER AS ONE CHURCH.

Let’s see all of the different Christian denominations “organize” that way… :rolleyes:

Also, I responded to a slew of your questions, and this is all you can come back with? Am I to assume that you wanted to know the answers? That you totally agree with them? I’ll never know, I guess.

Note to David B and/or Gaudere:

As Paeshrus made obvious, Everest is a sock puppet for him. (Something that I predicted a few pages back, but I digress), and as such, this poster is breaking rules.

At the least, I expect one of his identities to be taken away.


Yer pal,
Satan

http://www.raleighmusic.com/board/Images/devil.gif

I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Two weeks, one day, 16 hours, 6 minutes and 22 seconds.
626 cigarettes not smoked, saving $78.35.
Life saved: 2 days, 4 hours, 10 minutes.

Beautiful! I wish I’d said that! And your .sig is hilarious, too.

Beautiful! I wish I’d said that! And your .sig is hilarious, too.

Beautiful! I wish I’d said all that (although I trimmed some for tidiness)! And your .sig is hilarious, too.

Beautiful! I wish I’d said all that (although I trimmed some for tidiness)! And your .sig is hilarious, too.


On On

Beautiful! I wish I’d said all that (although I trimmed some for tidiness)! And your .sig is hilarious, too.


On On

Beautiful! I wish I’d said all that (although I trimmed some for tidiness)! And your .sig is hilarious, too.


On On

Wallym7 said:

and:

David B: (who should know better) said:

and:

and:

and

and:

Excuse me??! Is this the Pit??

It was my understanding that these sorts of personal attacks were not appropriate in any other forum, and certainly not in GB from a moderator.

David: Everyone is not going to agree with you all the time. Please conduct yourself appropriately in this forum, or take it to the Pit.

Thank you.

::

How ironic… CB,The Repentant Pitbull, trying to give lessons on posting etiquette.

As if.

Try living the example first. Maybe then you can have enough credibility to critique others.

Boomer:

I think the point is that people have made it repeatedly clear to you that not only did men not evolve from apes, but that no reputable evolutionist is claiming that they did. To continue to construct this straw man of science in order to further your particular religious views is at best persistently ignorant and at worst trollish. Can you maybe see, then, why people get a little testy the umpteenth time you make a demonstrably false characterization?

hardcore:

Are you suggesting that some are subject to the rules, but others are not? If so, what is your basis for such a determination, other than situational ethics or moral relativism?
::

Gaudere:

This is what I’ve been saying all along.
::

Gaudere:

OK. I think you answered my question to hardcore. The rules are to be applied arbitrarily and according to the general consensus of opinion.

Thank you. I understand.

::

No, CB, what I am trying to say is that you should conduct yourself as the AntiTroll for a significant period of time first, then perhaps you might have the moral authority to chastize others. Doing so now just makes you look foolish.

Now I am confused again. hardcore determines what is moral???
::

CB:

Do you intend to respond to my last post to you?

Scylla:

I am not prepared to concede that everything created itself out of nothing, Higgs field notwithstanding.

::

First, don’t flatter me. I’m Gadarene, not Gaudere. (Although someday, the IPU willing, I could make myself worthy of the comparison…)

Second…huh? What is what you’ve been saying all along, exactly?

This is the quote remarked upon by WallyM7:

He called it a “moronic statement” because you were using it, as you’ve used it before, in a sarcastic manner–as a characterization of ‘strange things evolutionists believe.’ It’s been pointed out to you that this is not what evolutionists believe, yet you persist in making the characterization.

Now how does my quote that

denote that rules are arbitrarily applied?

Look, consensus of opinion says you shouldn’t say things you know to be false. Consensus of opinion says you shouldn’t ascribe false opinions to people to make a rhetorical point. Consensus of opinion says that when you’re told again and again that evolutionary theory does not hold men to be descended from apes, you should maybe stop building the same tired straw man every time. In essence, consensus of opinion says we should be fighting ignorance here, not perpetuating it.

And this is arbitrary how, exactly? And this is morally relativistic how, exactly? And–really, Boomer–this is unfair to you how, exactly??

Let me see if I’ve learned anything from my 75 years reading this thread.

pashley, CalifBoomer, what’s your opinion of this argument:

  1. Whatever begins to exist, has a cause for it’s coming into being (something cannot spontaneously come to be without a causing agent).

2)The cosmos began to exist.

3)Therefore, the universe has a cause for its coming into being. (The Higgs field)
Is this sound?

CB:

No, the one after that where you misquoted me on Abiogenesis.