Radorth

So glad the Christians have no monopoly on faith. But at least we never claimed "rational thinking" made us inherently wise while putting forth wild short-lived theories, mindless analogies, believing all sorts of "missing link" hoaxes and nonsense, and agreeing on very little. We generally had the integrity to call it "faith."

Good damage control techniques though.

Rad

Amie

I don't understand why it seems that the many times Radorth posts *anything* somehow, someone inevitably starts bringing up other things he writes in other threads. Quite possibly the last bastion of someone just looking for an argument.

beyelzu

rad,

it I didnt have faith in christians to be objective and unbiased, I would think that you are incredibly mischaracterizing statements if not out and out lying.

Unforgiven Too

I admire you guys. I love you guys. I don't know where you get the patience.

I have lurked on a number of threads Radorth has participated in, and both he and Douglas Bender make my head hurt. They're like the Vancoomb lady on Mad TV. Stick your fingers in your ears and go "LA LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU, LA LA LA!" He doesn't even seem to have any reading comprehension.

I don't bother anymore. I have no patience. But I love to come on this site and be heartened by your gallant attempts to get through to theists.

And, scombrid:

:notworthy

I love how you turned it around like that!

Daggah

Oh, please. If you actually bothered to read this thread, you'd realize that Radorth was the one who brought up Darwin's little quote/evolution in this thread, in his pathetic rambling red-herring style. What *I* don't understand, Amie, is why you even bother defending the despicable bastard. If I was a Christian, even a fundamentalist one (which you are not), I'd be separating myself as far away from him as possible.

Radorth: ah, I see how it goes. Disproving your irrelevant and irrational arguments is "damage control." I suppose, then, that that is all you are here for? Damage control for Christianity? I guess I can see how our arguments against your anti-evolution ramblings might seem like damage control, to someone completely ignorant of what science is and how it operates.

And by the way, the list of hoaxes is few, and all of them were discovered by scientists...not creationists. And the missing link argument is completely and utterly bogus. Not that I'm surprised to see you vomiting up typical creationist nonsense!

Hell, for every 'hoax' fossil (I can only think of a few), there have been dozens upon dozens - if not hundreds! - of actual, valid transitional fossils. Not to mention dozens of genetic and biochemical forms of evidence that confirm the evolutionary pattern the fossil record reveals a dozen times over!

beyelzu

rad does bring this shit on himself, by insulting us infidels, making poor arguments, and then declaring victory, having a huge persecution complex. I am with daggah on this, I dont know why you are defending him Amie, except for some sort of xian bond.

Jack the Bodiless

Hmm. It seems that the point needs some more hammering to get through your skull, Radorth.
No, you did not. This is a lie, Radorth.
We were merely pointing out that there is no "doctrine of Darwinian Infallibility". You seem to have missed the fact that you FAILED to provide an actual example of where Darwin "got it wrong".

In your enthusiasm, you managed to delude yourself into believing that you HAD actually presented such an example, and that those who were pointing out that Darwin was human and fallible were actually conceding that Darwin was in error on this issue.

He was not.

From your quote of Darwin:
From your quote of Prothero:
There is actually no contradiction here, IF you realize that "abruptly" is a RELATIVE term. Prothero's "abruptly" spans thousands of years.

This was explained to you. And you abandoned the thread.

And now you are lying about it.

Gooch's dad

Hey, I plagiarized it from someone else, I just can't recall who! Help yourself.

-Kelly

wildernesse

Hmm. This comment would be ever so much more convincing IF these wild, mindless hoaxes and other nonsense were not found to be just that by rational minds. For what it is worth, the great majority of scientific mis-information is brought to us by journalists who sensationlize scientific "information" that neither they nor the general public understand. Which is sad--the purveyors of news/slop and those who sop it up are so scientifically illiterate that they agree with each other that U.S.A. Today is an appropriate venue to learn about breaking scientific news and discoveries.

--tibac

Infinity Lover

My fondness for Amie aside for a moment, I'd still have to say I've seen her stick up for atheists, agnostics and pagans at Christian Forums on numerous occasions (they are the ones outnumbered and getting heat over there); your "xian bond" assumption couldn't be further off the mark.

Once Radorth posted, the whole thread derailed into a multiple-poster jump on Rad fest. Mind you, I'm not saying people here don't have a point about what they're stating...

...but it's so obviously fucking point-less.

Unless I'm surrounded by folks oblivious to empirical evidence and incapable of leaning from past experiences (or in other words, chronicly thickskulled), everybody pounding on Radorth here, is well aware they're not going to accomplish one stinking thing. So why do it?

Maybe Amie's "looking for an argument" comment, wasn't that much of a shot in the dark. The reason she notices this sort of thing so often, is because people keep on doing it over :banghead: and over :banghead: and over :banghead: and... etc.