Octopus And Squid Evolution Is Officially Stranger Than We Could Have Ever Imagined

[SoldierMan]

And you are dishonest.

I'm pretty sure Jehova had something to say about that in Ephesians 4:25.

How was I dishonest?

Sorry biometrics, will keep my comments more friendly but if scudsucker remains antagonistic it could derail.

 

[scudsucker]

How was I dishonest?

In that you have:

- entered into a discussion with no intention of offering supporting evidence. If you had intended to discuss rather than a drive-by shit-post, you'd have offered some evidence for Intelligent Design and/or god. You have avoided that;

- intentionally or not, conflated evolution with the creation of life. The god dunnit argument needs both the origin of self replicating molecules and evolution itself to have been "designed" by an "intelligent" god. Evolution holds true - and has been proven - with or without a creation myth/story. It does not need that plank upon which to stand, unlike the religious counterpart.

- misrepresented Dawkins by stating his fanciful conjecture, after repeatedly making the point that no one knows how life started, is an admission of the need for a creator

Sorry biometrics, will keep my comments more friendly but if scudsucker remains antagonistic it could derail.

I am asking you for evidence. If that seems to you to be antagonistic I suggest you take old Jaweh's advice in Matthew 5:39



Edit: bonus dishonesty in your previous post - hypocrisy. You complain that I am antagonistic but fail to note that you yourself are the person producing insults and deriding the "typical clueless militant evolutionists"

 

[biometrics]

Sorry biometrics, will keep my comments more friendly but if scudsucker remains antagonistic it could derail.

That’s ok, we cater for that too.

Fuck you! No, fuck you!!!

This is the thread to have a shout at each other. Don't hold back.

thegrotto.co.za

 

[SoldierMan]

In that you have:

- entered into a discussion with no intention of offering supporting evidence. If you had intended to discuss rather than a drive-by shit-post, you'd have offered some evidence for Intelligent Design and/or god. You have avoided that;

- intentionally or not, conflated evolution with the creation of life. The god dunnit argument needs both the origin of self replicating molecules and evolution itself to have been "designed" by an "intelligent" god. Evolution holds true - and has been proven - with or without a creation myth/story. It does not need that plank upon which to stand, unlike the religious counterpart.

- misrepresented Dawkins by stating his fanciful conjecture, after repeatedly making the point that no one knows how life started, is an admission of the need for a creator



I am asking you for evidence. If that seems to you to be antagonistic I suggest you take old Jaweh's advice in Matthew 5:39



Edit: bonus dishonesty in your previous post - hypocrisy. You complain that I am antagonistic but fail to note that you yourself are the person producing insults and deriding the "typical clueless militant evolutionists"

So a drive by post is not allowed on this forum? It happens all the time.

As for the rest - I suggest you take a look at the tone of your first post to me - THAT set the stage for the rest of our conversation.

As for Dawkins I never said that he said it WAS aliens I said that he said that it was possible. Either you are too drunk to understand that or you just plain don't want to accept what I am saying ( I have said it about 3 times now) rather than what you think I am saying. The video makes it pretty clear so I don't understand how you are confused about this. Listen to what he says, not what you want him to say.

 

[SoldierMan]

That’s ok, we cater for that too.

Fuck you! No, fuck you!!!

This is the thread to have a shout at each other. Don't hold back.

thegrotto.co.za

Not really my style but hey each to their own.

 

[scudsucker]

Either you are too drunk to understand that...

I'm sorry, about that antagonism again?

 

[scudsucker]

So a drive by post is not allowed on this forum? It happens all the time.

You can drive by as much as you like, but it is dishonest to try to pretend you are interested in any discussion when you clearly are not.

As for the rest - I suggest you take a look at the tone of your first post to me - THAT set the stage for the rest of our conversation.

My first post in response to you:

By octopi

That set the tone? Sorry, little snowflake, I will try not to be so unbearably abusive in my next two word reply to your next shit-post.

 

[SoldierMan]

I'm sorry, about that antagonism again?

So now you ignore my entire post to focus on that Typical.

Hahahaha Oh I'm sorry I thought you were a grown up, are you a child or a girl by any chance who can't handle the slightest little altercation. Obviously you are not drunk, I just thought I would not outright call you stupid which was my first choice, and instead go with something a little softer which obviously isn't true. You would be a total mess if you debated with Churchill.....

 

[biometrics]

Focus people, focus...

 

[SoldierMan]

You can drive by as much as you like, but it is dishonest to try to pretend you are interested in any discussion when you clearly are not.


My first post in response to you:

That set the tone? Sorry, little snowflake, I will try not to be so unbearably abusive in my next two word reply to your next shit-post.

Mind your own business I will partake in whatever discussion I like. Whether I am pretending to or not is also none of your business so keep your thoughts to yourself. Unlike you who's only contribution has been one of antagonism and combatism.

Ah sorry this is the post I was referring to. Clearly you were being a jerk from the first sentence.

You talk complete nonsense at the best of times.

When you have scientific evidence for the existence of god, you can bring up intelligent design as a creation mechanism. Until then, stick to your own paradigm.

 

[scudsucker]

are you a child or a girl by any chance

Interesting choice of words here.


I must say I admire the way you follow the tenets of your religion:

Obviously you are not drunk, I just thought I would not outright call you stupid which was my first choice, and instead go with something a little softer which obviously isn't true. You would be a total mess if you debated with Churchill.....

Churchill and I, while doing so, would at least use grammatically correct English.

 

[Dave]

 

[SoldierMan]

Interesting choice of words here.


I must say I admire the way you follow the tenets of your religion:

Churchill and I, whole doing so, would at least use grammatically correct English.

 

[SoldierMan]

View attachment 10049

Yeah I agree, the religion of atheism is about as strong as that of any other religion. Only difference is they really have zero clue that a God doesn't exist, it's just one big guess, but they base their entire life around it.

 

[scudsucker]

Yeah I agree, the religion of atheism is about as strong as that of any other religion. Only difference is they really have zero clue that a God doesn't exist, it's just one big guess, but they base their entire life around it.

Tut tut. You are being dishonest again.

1 Peter 2:1 for you tonight.

 

[Dave]

the religion of atheism

That's a new one, could you explain that?

As a Pastafarian I do like to learn about all the fairy tales.

 

[SoldierMan]

Tut tut. You are being dishonest again.

1 Peter 2:1 for you tonight.

You know your Bible verses better than the average Christian, why is that?

And yes evolution is like a religion for some atheists. There was one of the famous evolutionists who was actually brave enough to admit that it was like a religion him and others like him. He just had the balls to admit it.

If it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

 

[Seldom Bucket]

That's a new one, could you explain that?

As a Pastafarian I do like to learn about all the fairy tales.

The AL'Father Odin agrees

 

[SoldierMan]

That's a new one, could you explain that?

As a Pastafarian I do like to learn about all the fairy tales.

Yeah sure.

"Dr. Michael Ruse, from the Department of Philosophy at the University of Guelph in Ontario, is a philosopher of science, particularly of the evolutionary sciences. He is the author of several books on Darwinism and evolutionary theory, and, in an article in the National Post, he wrote:"

Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. . . . Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.

 

[SoldierMan]

Here's another.

Listen to the amazing words of Charles Darwin, whom many consider the "father" of evolution: "I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions wondering over all the time over everything and to my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion out of them." Charles Darwin admitted that his wonderings and suggestions became a religion.