Dear Aimoo User:

We added a function of Aimoo Ticket. If you met errors in Aimoo, you can add ticket to us. we will confirm it and process it first.
Free Speech
FSA Ticket | Today | Join | Member | Search | Help | Sign In | |
FSA > Theology and Spirtuality > This life and the after life Go to subcategory:
Author Content
Tomlapaz
  • From:USA

Date Posted:01-04-2018 06:27:08

A descendant of David was born in Bethlehem (as foretold by the Jewish prophet Micah), died for the sins of his people and raised from the dead (as foretold by the Jewish prophet Isaiah and Jewish King David), 2000 years ago (in the time as foretold by the Jewish prophet Daniel). And because of this descendant of David, men and women everywhere have the means of finding peace with the Creator of the heavens and the earth. The forgiveness of sins.

Jesus: For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you believe not his writings, how shall you believe my words? Psalm 37:21 The wicked borrows and does not pay back, But the righteous is gracious and gives.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #271
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:29-04-2018 08:46:10

Reply to skwanderer

 Wale is a moron who hasn’t read one thing I’ve posted.  He hasn’t refuted a single scientific citation on actual
Observations of evolution ...,that are fact.  He claims disagreeing about something unrelated to the fact of observations of evolutions means....it is not a fact.  It is like saying I don’t think Einstein’s equation is correct, so gravity is not a fact. He is quite simply, a fucking moron.  An imbecile. A willful idiot.  

As always,  imagine my shock that in nearly 10 pages he has provided no refutation whatsoever to the actual observations of evolution I’ve posted 


TRANSLATION

" I declare MYSELF to be the resident intellectual and any contradictions of my pronouncements will be met with tantrums-skdamder"

Yobbo Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #272
  • From:New_zealand

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:30-04-2018 07:56:39

No, what skwanderer is saying is that you have a closed mind and refuse to consider evidence presented to you.
And of course, he is 100% correct..

"Les hommes ne font jamais le mal si complètement et joyeusement que lorsqu'ils le font par conviction religieuse." Blaise Pascal
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #273
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:30-04-2018 08:12:39

Reply to Yobbo

No, what skwanderer is saying is that you have a closed mind and refuse to consider evidence presented to you.
And of course, he is 100% correct..


No, that is what YOU want it to read as.
Yobbo Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #274
  • From:New_zealand

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:01-05-2018 12:32:50

Forgive me for being so literal.
"Les hommes ne font jamais le mal si complètement et joyeusement que lorsqu'ils le font par conviction religieuse." Blaise Pascal
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #275
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:01-05-2018 12:40:50

Reply to Yobbo

Forgive me for being so literal.

You weren't literal at all. Besides, the premise is incorrect anyway, par for the course for you.
Yobbo Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #276
  • From:New_zealand

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:01-05-2018 07:54:29

Reply to wale63

Reply to Yobbo

Forgive me for being so literal.

You weren't literal at all. Besides, the premise is incorrect anyway, par for the course for you.

Explain why you assert that the premise is incorrect.  If you don't it will mean you can't.
"Les hommes ne font jamais le mal si complètement et joyeusement que lorsqu'ils le font par conviction religieuse." Blaise Pascal
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #277
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:01-05-2018 07:57:31

Reply to Yobbo

Reply to wale63

Reply to Yobbo

Forgive me for being so literal.

You weren't literal at all. Besides, the premise is incorrect anyway, par for the course for you.

Explain why you assert that the premise is incorrect.  If you don't it will mean you can't.

Thank God reality is not based on your juvenile dictates.
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #278
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:05-05-2018 03:58:44

 TRANSLATION

" I declare MYSELF to be the resident intellectual and any contradictions of my pronouncements will be met with tantrums-skdamder"

____


Translation:  I have never understood anything about evolution, I have no clue how it works,  I cannot refute a single scientific citation by skwanderer, I have no clue of the difference between disagreeing with a mechanism of evolution versus and the fact of evolution, and I am unable to enter this debate at all.

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #279
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:05-05-2018 04:02:23

 He cant explain anything Yobbo.  He has no idea of any of the science of evolution, which is why he cannot even discuss it.  He would be so absolutely lost trying to understand genetic drift or polyploidy or anything remotely related to actual science.  He hasn't refuted a single scientific study.  He can only copy a quote of a dead scientist who disagrees with some of the influences of the various mechanisms of evolution, without even realizing that his quotes from scientists actually agreed with the "fact of evolution".

He is a fucking idiot who has yet to enter the discussion.

It is page 10 wale...don't you think it might be time to begin to refute the scientific citations of the facts of observed evolution in action? 

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #280
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:06-05-2018 06:44:19

Reply to skwanderer

 He cant explain anything Yobbo.  He has no idea of any of the science of evolution, which is why he cannot even discuss it.  He would be so absolutely lost trying to understand genetic drift or polyploidy or anything remotely related to actual science.  He hasn't refuted a single scientific study.  He can only copy a quote of a dead scientist who disagrees with some of the influences of the various mechanisms of evolution, without even realizing that his quotes from scientists actually agreed with the "fact of evolution".

He is a fucking idiot who has yet to enter the discussion.

It is page 10 wale...don't you think it might be time to begin to refute the scientific citations of the facts of observed evolution in action? 


TRANSLATION

 " I skdoodle do not like when explanations do not fit MY conceptualizations and notions- skdoodle"

Bogus0Pomp Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #281
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 12:25:12

It is page 10 wale...don't you think it might be time to begin to refute the scientific citations of the facts of observed evolution in action?

Apparently not.

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z "[i]If you can read these 26 letters, there is nothing about the universe that you can't learn.,[/i]" -- Lambros D. Callimoahos
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #282
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 12:40:08

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

It is page 10 wale...don't you think it might be time to begin to refute the scientific citations of the facts of observed evolution in action?

Apparently not.


I don't have to as they haven't been established. Parroting skdoodle doesn't further your attempted rebuttal AND skdoodle's conflicts with information presented is his, not binding on reality.
Bogus0Pomp Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #283
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 03:08:08

Reply to wale63

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

It is page 10 wale...don't you think it might be time to begin to refute the scientific citations of the facts of observed evolution in action?

Apparently not


I don't have to as they haven't been established. Parroting skdoodle doesn't further your attempted rebuttal AND skdoodle's conflicts with information presented is his, not binding on reality.

Making nonsensical excuses and name calling does not further you attempted to dismissal of the scientific citations skwanderer has numerously presented here as evidence of the reality of evolution.  Your beliefs are not binding on reality.

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z "[i]If you can read these 26 letters, there is nothing about the universe that you can't learn.,[/i]" -- Lambros D. Callimoahos
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #284
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 04:15:42

 TRANSLATION

 " I skdoodle do not like when explanations do not fit MY conceptualizations and notions- skdoodle"

I don't have to as they haven't been established. Parroting skdoodle doesn't further your attempted rebuttal AND skdoodle's conflicts with information presented is his, not binding on reality.


___


What explanations?  You have offered none.  I posted scientific facts.  We have observed evolution take place.  The genetic drift or change in allele frequencies in the genomes of animals resulting in morphological change over time is established fact. That is the textbook definition of evolution.   You have offered no rebuttal to any of the science that I have posted.  None.

Lets just start with a couple tiny examples of two forms of evolution, genetic drift and reproductive isolation, and polyploidy. 

Hybrid speciation...common in plants and also observed in some animals. Sometimes when gamete (sex) cells divide, they create an extra copy and are known as polyploidy.  They pass on the extra copy and the offspring are also polyploidy.  They can not mate with the parental line, but they can mate with other hybrid "mistakes", making a tetraploid offspring, or new species that is different from both parental lines, only capable of mating with others that are the same. That is the emergence of a new species in a single generation.  That is the most rapid form of evolution. It doesn't take a mass of mutations accumulating over generations to create a different species - all it takes is some event that reproductively isolates one group of individuals from another.

https://academic.oup.com/jhered/article/98/2/136/2187871

The mechanisms you are most familiar with (my bad, you are familiar with none) are many small mutations over generations that over time result in progeny that are different from their great great great great great great grandparents....also known to be fact.

The apple maggot fly, Rhagoletis pomonella is a prime example of a species divergence. These flies are native to the United States, and up until the discovery of the Americas by Europeans, fed solely on hawthorns. But with the arrival of new people came a new potential food source to its habitat: apples. At first, the flies ignored the tasty treats. But over time, some flies realized they could eat the apples, too, and began switching trees. While alone this doesn't explain why the flies would speciate, a curious quirk of their biology does: apple maggot flies mate on the tree they're born on. As a few flies jumped trees, they cut themselves off from the rest of their species, even though they were but a few feet away. When geneticists took a closer look in the late 20th century, they found that the two types - those that feed on apples and those that feed on hawthorns - have different allele frequencies. Indeed, right under our noses, Rhagoletis pomonella speciated.


http://www.nature.com/articles/336061a0


Now Wale...you tell me how this is not observed evolution.   A fact.





"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #285
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 06:03:25

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

Reply to wale63

Reply to Bogus0Pomp

It is page 10 wale...don't you think it might be time to begin to refute the scientific citations of the facts of observed evolution in action?

Apparently not


I don't have to as they haven't been established. Parroting skdoodle doesn't further your attempted rebuttal AND skdoodle's conflicts with information presented is his, not binding on reality.

Making nonsensical excuses and name calling does not further you attempted to dismissal of the scientific citations skwanderer has numerously presented here as evidence of the reality of evolution.  Your beliefs are not binding on reality.


Piggybacking skdoodle won't make your case any more valid. REALITY is binding on reality and the REALITY is as it exists, not as you wish it to be.
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #286
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 06:05:17

Reply to skwanderer

 TRANSLATION

 " I skdoodle do not like when explanations do not fit MY conceptualizations and notions- skdoodle"

I don't have to as they haven't been established. Parroting skdoodle doesn't further your attempted rebuttal AND skdoodle's conflicts with information presented is his, not binding on reality.


___


What explanations?  You have offered none.  I posted scientific facts.  We have observed evolution take place.  The genetic drift or change in allele frequencies in the genomes of animals resulting in morphological change over time is established fact. That is the textbook definition of evolution.   You have offered no rebuttal to any of the science that I have posted.  None.

Lets just start with a couple tiny examples of two forms of evolution, genetic drift and reproductive isolation, and polyploidy. 

Hybrid speciation...common in plants and also observed in some animals. Sometimes when gamete (sex) cells divide, they create an extra copy and are known as polyploidy.  They pass on the extra copy and the offspring are also polyploidy.  They can not mate with the parental line, but they can mate with other hybrid "mistakes", making a tetraploid offspring, or new species that is different from both parental lines, only capable of mating with others that are the same. That is the emergence of a new species in a single generation.  That is the most rapid form of evolution. It doesn't take a mass of mutations accumulating over generations to create a different species - all it takes is some event that reproductively isolates one group of individuals from another.

https://academic.oup.com/jhered/article/98/2/136/2187871

The mechanisms you are most familiar with (my bad, you are familiar with none) are many small mutations over generations that over time result in progeny that are different from their great great great great great great grandparents....also known to be fact.

The apple maggot fly, Rhagoletis pomonella is a prime example of a species divergence. These flies are native to the United States, and up until the discovery of the Americas by Europeans, fed solely on hawthorns. But with the arrival of new people came a new potential food source to its habitat: apples. At first, the flies ignored the tasty treats. But over time, some flies realized they could eat the apples, too, and began switching trees. While alone this doesn't explain why the flies would speciate, a curious quirk of their biology does: apple maggot flies mate on the tree they're born on. As a few flies jumped trees, they cut themselves off from the rest of their species, even though they were but a few feet away. When geneticists took a closer look in the late 20th century, they found that the two types - those that feed on apples and those that feed on hawthorns - have different allele frequencies. Indeed, right under our noses, Rhagoletis pomonella speciated.


http://www.nature.com/articles/336061a0


Now Wale...you tell me how this is not observed evolution.   A fact.






TRANSLATION

" I, skdoodle, keep coming back because it disturbs me thsat my word and my pronouncements are not taken simply because I enunciate them-

skdoodle"

(evolution not a fact)

skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #287
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 06:07:52

 
Imagine my shock that Wale continues to have no rebuttal to the facts I present and continues to attack me like a third grader when none of the words (studies I posted) are mine.

It is page 10 Wale.  Don't you think it is time that you enter this discussion and present some sort of rebuttal to the scientific facts I have posted?


"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #288
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 06:13:11

 I tried to keep it simple for you Wale.  Here is just one species that presents hard data on the fact of evolution.  It has evolved to become reproductively isolated and separate ...a new species....and in a very short time frame.  Tell us why it is wrong and not in fact, evolution.   Ill even help....you can claim it is not "macroevolution" and is only evolution within a "kind" as creationists like to claim.  We can go from there...even though it is an example of factual evolution regardless of whether micro or macro.  Lets see if we can at least get you to see that evolution is a fact at this level.

tp://www.nature.com/articles/336061a0


"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #289
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 06:14:45

Reply to skwanderer

 
Imagine my shock that Wale continues to have no rebuttal to the facts I present and continues to attack me like a third grader when none of the words (studies I posted) are mine.

It is page 10 Wale.  Don't you think it is time that you enter this discussion and present some sort of rebuttal to the scientific facts I have posted?



TRANSLATION

"I, skdoodle, keep coming back because it disturbs me thsat my word and my pronouncements are not taken simply because I enunciate them-

skdoodle"

skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #290
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 06:21:45

 TRANSLATION

"I, skdoodle, keep coming back because it disturbs me thsat my word and my pronouncements are not taken simply because I enunciate them-

____ 


They are not my pronunciations.  They are studies and scientific observations that I have presented, and for which you can offer no rebuttal other than to call me names. 

Am I to take this as your final pronouncement that you have no intent to ever debate any scientific data on the subject?

That is typically how it works among adults.  You make a claim (evolution is not a fact).  I present data that refutes your claim (scientific studies of observed evolution).  You present data to refute the scientific studies if you have any.  We have stalled at you calling me names and failing to present a technical argument for the past 8-9 pages. I have been very patient.

Don't you think it might be time to look at any of the many scientific studies I have posted and refute them?


"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #291
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 06:46:47

Reply to skwanderer

 TRANSLATION

"I, skdoodle, keep coming back because it disturbs me thsat my word and my pronouncements are not taken simply because I enunciate them-

____ 


They are not my pronunciations.  They are studies and scientific observations that I have presented, and for which you can offer no rebuttal other than to call me names. 

Am I to take this as your final pronouncement that you have no intent to ever debate any scientific data on the subject?

That is typically how it works among adults.  You make a claim (evolution is not a fact).  I present data that refutes your claim (scientific studies of observed evolution).  You present data to refute the scientific studies if you have any.  We have stalled at you calling me names and failing to present a technical argument for the past 8-9 pages. I have been very patient.

Don't you think it might be time to look at any of the many scientific studies I have posted and refute them?



TRANSLATION

" I decide what is valid and not, and if I don't agree, it's not valid-skdoodle"

skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #292
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 07:39:08

 Science has decided the studies of actual observations of evolution are valid. Not me.  You keep making this about me and calling me names. Although that is terribly childlish, I continue to give you every opportunity to defend your claims.

You claim evolution is not a fact.  Science has documented it with actual observations that you have yet to refute.

This is page 10, don't you think it is time for you to enter this discussion and defend your claims?

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #293
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 08:54:05

Reply to skwanderer

 Science has decided the studies of actual observations of evolution are valid. Not me.  You keep making this about me and calling me names. Although that is terribly childlish, I continue to give you every opportunity to defend your claims.

You claim evolution is not a fact.  Science has documented it with actual observations that you have yet to refute.

This is page 10, don't you think it is time for you to enter this discussion and defend your claims?


First you cannot have an actual conversation because you eliminate the CAUSE of ALL existence, God. You say there I NO reality of God, which DOES mean, in English, he doesn't exist. YOU confine your basis of that to WITHIN the confines of fimite tools and understanding, including science in the finite column, and yet make pronouncements with finite results, tools and understanding that ALL this came from somewhere, so called scientific explanations not withstanding.

You've made the limited, in the grand picture, discipline of science take the place of OMNISCIENCE and OMNIPOTENCE and therefore ALL your understanding and answers are skewed.

Bogus0Pomp Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #294
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 09:15:07

This is page 10, don't you think it is time for you to enter this discussion and defend your claims?

Clearly the answer is "no," skwanderer.  Not that you honestly expected any other answer.

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z "[i]If you can read these 26 letters, there is nothing about the universe that you can't learn.,[/i]" -- Lambros D. Callimoahos
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #295
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 09:19:01

 First you cannot have an actual conversation because you eliminate the CAUSE of ALL existence, God. You say there I NO reality of God, which DOES mean, in English, he doesn't exist. YOU confine your basis of that to WITHIN the confines of fimite tools and understanding, including science in the finite column, and yet make pronouncements with finite results, tools and understanding that ALL this came from somewhere, so called scientific explanations not withstanding.

You've made the limited, in the grand picture, discipline of science take the place of OMNISCIENCE and OMNIPOTENCE and therefore ALL your understanding and answers are skewed.

__________________

I created no such boundary within the conversation. You are free to believe the cause of all existence is God. Since God is allegedly infinite, he may have caused infinity of space, time and matter. It is entirely irrelevant to the facts of evolution.  There is no evidence that God exists, but you are free to believe.  You are making excuses for your inability to support your claims.

For whatever reason, our earth exists. As such, evolution of life occurs without any supernatural intervention and is a fact.

Evolution of life occurs.  It is a fact.

You claimed that evolution of life is not a fact.  It is page 10, don't you think it is about time you join the conversation and defend your claim?

Why are you working so hard at avoiding any attempt at supporting your claim?



"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #296
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 09:25:55

Reply to skwanderer

 First you cannot have an actual conversation because you eliminate the CAUSE of ALL existence, God. You say there I NO reality of God, which DOES mean, in English, he doesn't exist. YOU confine your basis of that to WITHIN the confines of fimite tools and understanding, including science in the finite column, and yet make pronouncements with finite results, tools and understanding that ALL this came from somewhere, so called scientific explanations not withstanding.

You've made the limited, in the grand picture, discipline of science take the place of OMNISCIENCE and OMNIPOTENCE and therefore ALL your understanding and answers are skewed.

__________________

I created no such boundary within the conversation. You are free to believe the cause of all existence is God. Since God is allegedly infinite, he may have caused infinity of space, time and matter. It is entirely irrelevant to the facts of evolution.  There is no evidence that God exists, but you are free to believe.  You are making excuses for your inability to support your claims.

For whatever reason, our earth exists. As such, evolution of life occurs without any supernatural intervention and is a fact.

Evolution of life occurs.  It is a fact.

You claimed that evolution of life is not a fact.  It is page 10, don't you think it is about time you join the conversation and defend your claim?

Why are you working so hard at avoiding any attempt at supporting your claim?




Not irrelevant at all and you'll continue to deny that which started it all with a lesser discipline, not containing all answers but applying that to a greater existence and if YOUR fabricated conclusions do not agree you'll continue declaring YOURSELF and your conclusions superior to the reality.... which is God. It ALL starts there.
skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #297
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 09:28:14

 Clearly the answer is "no," skwanderer.  Not that you honestly expected any other answer.

___


Wale will parade every excuse in the book before looking at the scientific studies of observed evolution and attempting to support his claims. He still has a few excuses to go.  Plus, he is nowhere near as good at obfuscation as Tomas.  He simply repeats his erroneous excuses over and over.  Tomas is a master of obfuscating in circles.  The end result is the same in both instances, neither are capable of a technical discussion of the data.  I am patient and will methodically stick to the facts and ask for a discussion of them, if for no other purpose than to expose their disingenuousness.  But who knows, one of them may someday actually discuss the studies.

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #298
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 09:30:00

Reply to skwanderer

 Clearly the answer is "no," skwanderer.  Not that you honestly expected any other answer.

___


Wale will parade every excuse in the book before looking at the scientific studies of observed evolution and attempting to support his claims. He still has a few excuses to go.  Plus, he is nowhere near as good at obfuscation as Tomas.  He simply repeats his erroneous excuses over and over.  Tomas is a master of obfuscating in circles.  The end result is the same in both instances, neither are capable of a technical discussion of the data.  I am patient and will methodically stick to the facts and ask for a discussion of them, if for no other purpose than to expose their disingenuousness.  But who knows, one of them may someday actually discuss the studies.


TRANSLATION

" Since I don't get the answers I want , AS I WANT them worded and concluded, I will respond as I have -skdoodle"

skwanderer Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #299
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:07-05-2018 10:33:39

 TRANSLATION

" Since I don't get the answers I want , AS I WANT them worded and concluded, I will respond as I have -skdoodle"

_________


You have provided no answers for which to critique Wale.  You have claimed that evolution, the change in genetics over time resulting in new species, is not a fact.  I have provided factual scientific studies that say otherwise.  You have as yet refused to rebut the studies in any way whatsoever.   You continue to do nothing but call me names and avoid discussion.

It is page 10 Wale, don't you think it is about time to look at even one of the studies I have posted about observed evolution and make some sort of attempt at backing up your claim?

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." Albert Einstein
wale63 Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #300
  • From:USA

Re:Resurrection Sunday

Date Posted:08-05-2018 01:02:41

Reply to skwanderer

 TRANSLATION

" Since I don't get the answers I want , AS I WANT them worded and concluded, I will respond as I have -skdoodle"

_________


You have provided no answers for which to critique Wale.  You have claimed that evolution, the change in genetics over time resulting in new species, is not a fact.  I have provided factual scientific studies that say otherwise.  You have as yet refused to rebut the studies in any way whatsoever.   You continue to do nothing but call me names and avoid discussion.

It is page 10 Wale, don't you think it is about time to look at even one of the studies I have posted about observed evolution and make some sort of attempt at backing up your claim?


TRANSLATION

" I have a need to show everyone that I am the intellectual that lives in my mind- skdoodle"

Copyright © 2000-2018 Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.