Posts by Abaddon

19

UFO Crash in New Mexico

by metatron in

jw
friends

http://www.cortezjournal.com/asp-bin/article_generation.asp?article_type=news&article_path=/news/07/news070524_7.htm.

i find the road and poured concrete in the middle of nowhere interesting.

i also notice that debunking.

Abaddon

Here's the link;

http://www.skepdic.com/aztec.html

metatron

Look, you do it to yourself you do. I almost KNOW you will be in on any thread insisting that something that is unproven exists and there is a big cover-up that you know about as you are so clever.

Rense is simply a site that accumulates information from all over the place. Much of it is inaccurate and biased but since it simply posts such material uncritically, I find it repellent that you simply dismiss such items altogether lumped together prejudicially.

Using a site that knowingly publishes any concievable rubbish as a source of information is like using a trash can as a source of food. There's an evolutionst called Hooberus on this board who uses a website I have shown time and time again to be utter rubbish to support his mad Creationist beliefs. I am sure you think he's mistaken yet your research has all the rigour, reliability and methodology of his.

Simply because it's posted there means nothing as to its origin or truthfulness, it's just posted there.
And as for the matter of UFO's , I don't see how any honest person can investigate this field, even superficially, and not conclude that the US government is not to be believed on the subject.

LOL. That assumpton is based on you assuming there is truth to stories of UFO's. Can't you see the flaw in the logic of that?

Some people say they have seen UFO's -> You think there are UFO's -> Therefore any denial of UFO's by the US government is a lie.

It's called presupositionalism; doesn't matter whether one is presupposing the existence of god or of UFO's, in neither case does one have EVIDENCE, but despite this the presumption is used as a truth to base an argument on. Rather than provide proof of UFO's you blame the US government for you not being able to prove your theory.

The semi-official COMETA report from French military and political officials made this same point. So, when you assert that 'hoaxers' exist as the cause for some phenomena, I suggest you contrast such with the proven fact that the US government has little credibility in this and many other matters. Life is often a game of poker and you have no choice but to choos one liar over others.

Just like the brainless 9/11 possee. They use the fact the US government sucks like a cheap whore and has similar morals to one. On top of this reasonable fact and all the stuff that is provable (Iran in the '50's, The False Cold War, refusing to broker peace in Afghanistan when the Russians wanted to withdraw, destabilisation of democratic Latin American reigemes, WoMD, the list goes on and on), they build little fantasies and use the US's track record to insist that IF it was untruthful in x example (say the False Cold War), it must be untruthful about UFO's and 9/11.

They ignore that the ones that are provable are provable, and the ones that aren't aren't, insisting that it is the US governmrent's fault they can't prove their monmanacal conspiracy theories.

But meta, you obviously like believing this stuff, so I doubt argment will pursuade you otherwise.

105

After reading many topics.. I'm confused. Is this a JW forum or an ANTI-JW?

by MichaelM in

jw
friends

i'm studying with a jehovah's witness and it makes quite a bit of sense but i've been reading many topics on here and it seems that i can find every christian denomination and every religion except jehovahs witnesses.

do any jw's actually browse here?

maybe i'm just getting unlucky and picking the wrong topics where everyones discussing about how they used to be jw's.

Abaddon

Michael

If you were thinking of buying a car, and the salesman said;

"One thing you must never do is listen to anyone who has owned this car in the past and then sold it; they are all liars or mislead, and you will be decieved by them and lose out on the opporunity to drive the car."

Would you buy a car off someone who tried to stop you talking to any previous owners?

If you would, I have a car you might be interested in. PM me.

If you wouldn't, then stay and learn why so many JW's are xJW's.

33

So sick to death of the whole 'find Maddie' campaign - now includes Pope

by needproof in

jw
friends

i am sure most of you are now aware of the missing british girl madeleine mccann, who was abducted from portugal a few weeks ago.

the media is making a massive thing about this, and i am just wondering why.

they say 70,000 kids go missing each year in the uk alone - but this case seems to be unique in that it is so widely reported.

Abaddon

I would caution people against subscribing to urban myths.

'Everyone' knows that people are deliberately killed to make snuff movies right?

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.asp

And obviously there is a burgoning child sex slave industry

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article1795921.ece

http://www.walnet.org/csis/papers/doezema-loose.html

Obviously some girls are kidnapped by organised criminal gangs an held as slaves, or so close to slaver as makes no difference. But the evidence of world-wide organised rings of child sex-slavers simply isn't there.

Unfortunately the missing ones are mostly likely taken by local sexual predators, there's no need to make up a massive conspiracy. It's just easy and more comforting to make your nice neighour not a suspect at the cost of demonising some fictional crime lord.

I also so think it is way easy to judge others; the other kid needproof mentioned was playing outside its grandmother's door in the heart of the countryside and went missing. One can go along the road of due dilegence straight into the arms of lack of persective. I doubt for one moment any one would regard them as careless or bad parents until this happened they're the same people they were beforehand. Let's not forget who the criminals in this really are.

33

So sick to death of the whole 'find Maddie' campaign - now includes Pope

by needproof in

jw
friends

i am sure most of you are now aware of the missing british girl madeleine mccann, who was abducted from portugal a few weeks ago.

the media is making a massive thing about this, and i am just wondering why.

they say 70,000 kids go missing each year in the uk alone - but this case seems to be unique in that it is so widely reported.

Abaddon

She's a pretty, white. blonde girl from a good family with educated parents.

I totally agree with 'what about the rest'?

But I also know if such a tragedy befell me or mine I would ride the press until it screamed like the whore it is to keep the story in the press.

34

OK, so let's test the Creationism advocates out here.............

by 5go in

i responce to this post .

i'll start it off, then someone else give them a different challenge if you can think of any.. please give definitive examples that by evolution, a species has changed into something else.

give two separate findings by scientists, and it can't include any comments like "so we believe", "so we conclude that", or "the evidence shows that there could have been".....the wts has those copyrighted.. try and give un-doctored photographic proof, where possible, etc.

Abaddon

Sarah

I think you need to get out of the theory and figure out if these people who started the theory were christains? I say yes!

And? So? What? The religious beliefs of a scientist mean nothing if their theory is good.

And please, read a biography on Darwin before you start claiming him as a Cristian. If you (because you didn't care enough about fact and truth) carry on claiming he was a Christian when he became an agnostic, you are lying. Up to now it would have been through being misinformed.

I will take my chances with Jehovah rather than books that can not compare to Gods word the Bible.

And what does the Bible compare to? A book of myths. Did you realise the dates the Bible infers for the Flood are impossible; at the time claimed there was an entire Egyptian civilsation that survived without noticing it - the Great Pyramid was built several hundred years BEFORE the possible Flood drates and shows no signs of any Flood. There are trees alive tFdy that were standing when the Fooda is meant to have happened

I guess prior to your death you will have a change of heart because what else will you have mutation in the grave? It least the bible gives hope for mankind.

Only those mankind that ignore facts. Please realise god's existing and the Bible being accurate are two different things.

450

Isn't God Awesome?

by Perry in

http://wonderofitall.com/

Abaddon

fifi

There are no aquatic mammals whose intelligences can compare to Vinny's. I don't think we an even find a vertebrate to compare it to. Photoplankton? Whoops... no, a contingent just underwent rapid evolution in order to be able to vocally complain about that comparison...

However, I don't think he's a big enough fool to post on this thread again. He's no longer getting the validation he does it for and the dissonance must be really uncomfy.

Let's face it people. jokes aside it is unlikely he is as sure as he sounds; the desperation in his posts is quite tangible. It is almost as if he believes if he says he's right enough times all those nasty doubts can go away. Most of can remember those occasions where we just kept up tihe bland on-message bullshit in the face of information we couldn't handle. Vinny's no better or worse than many of us were.

Get better, eh Vinny?

450

Isn't God Awesome?

by Perry in

http://wonderofitall.com/

Abaddon

Vinny

Nice to see I can still jerk your strings puppet boy. You really are 0wned. As I am bored I will feed the troll - that's you Einstein.

Again I get the standard bilge; Vinny basically supposes if he can't imagine how it happened an imaginary creature that he has no proof of pops out of where did it.

As a true coward, he doesn't really answer the flaws in his argument. As we all know, Vinny uses special pleading to try and get out of his insistence complexity cannot come about without a designer, by insisting the designer was always there. All we get in response is;

Like it, don't like it. Believe it, don't believe it; whatever the case, there is no special pleading here. This makes sense and is a reasonable concept to myself and to many others. The Supreme Being would be the one and only exception.

Which is WHY it is called 'special pleading'. I can't believe you're enough of an ass to actual validate the definition of special pleading when you're insisting you're not using it. It's obvious you really don't want to or can't understand a simple concept like that; no wonder you have a hard time understanding evolution.

You then show your level of ignorance;

that which contradicts the Bible in any way cannot be correct.

Presuppostionalist. And either through wilful deciet or equally wilful igorance, a liar. There are trees still growing in California which were alive when the Earth is meant to have been subjected to the Flood; just one fact of many that show the Bible to be inaccurate. There are hundreds of others, but as you will not respond (or rather, cannot respond) to dendrochronology in any concrete way, I'll not waste my time listing them.

Back to your untrammeled ignorance of evolution;

Again, by some accidental, casual, fortuitous, stroke of luck?

Unable to actually argue the science (which shows evolutionary progress is so statistically removed from accidental as to make any who claim it is know-nothing ass clowns), he makes another fallacious argument known as a straw man; Vinny, this has nothing to do with the Wizard of Oz, it means as you cannot deal with the real evolutionary argument you lie about what the evolutionary argument is.

It bypasses the "Every beginning has a Cause" universal principle.

LOL. Keep it up! You just contradicted yourself again!

Folks, this is one reason why the internet is so coooool, everything that is being said, is in PRINT. Just reading what our little atheists have to say is LAUGHABLE here. I feel sorry for them. Seriously. Poor little atheists. They are completely stuck in mud with their beliefs.

As I have already told you Vinny, the only reason people are bothering with you is that you make an excellent sounding board for showing how utterly mindless some religious people are as regards their beliefs. The fact you really do not understand how badly you are exposed is just an added amusement.

******I have stated more than once that the bible is rarely used in my arguments. It is not needed. What I have clearly shown is that the bible only collaborates when I say that the Supreme Creator had no beginning and needs no beginning.

You cannot prove the Bible is relaible, therefore any claim made based on the assumption the Bible supports god having no begining is not relaible. It's just your opinion. Thus your claim you do not use special pleading is invalid.

Christ threw out the money changers. Christ exposed the hypocritical religious leaders. Christ exposed their false teachings. He called them blind guides and offsprings of vipers and other things similar because they were just that.

But you're the one being a liar and a hypocrite Vinny

I do not use foul language anywhere at anytime. I do laugh a lot, but that is because lame atheist teachings are laughable.

Again, deceit. I never said you swore, I just said you don't behave like a Christian following Christ's example should. Underlining your conceit and hypocritical behaviour using your own beliefs is simply an appropriate way of dealing with you.

40

OK, so let's test the science advocates out here.............

by NotaNess in

i'll start it off, then someone else give them a different challenge if you can think of any.. please give definitive examples that by evolution, a species has changed into something else.

give two separate findings by scientists, and it can't include any comments like "so we believe", "so we conclude that", or "the evidence shows that there could have been".....the wts has those copyrighted.. try and give un-doctored photographic proof, where possible, etc.

by the way the hominid skulls and the like will not be accepted, transition has never been proven, i don't think, just that they are different, and scientists "believe", they are pre-homo-sapiens.. i'm not saying you won't have examples, we just want you to walk the talk.

Abaddon

acdain

Question One is as yet not answered definitavely.

Question Two is easy; a change between species happens very slowly, as illustrated in his thread. All members of a population alive at any one time will be suffciently close to each other to breed.

That doesn't stop the pairing producing the highest number of survivng progeny still passing more of their genes into the next genertion than those without whatever it takes to do that.

40

OK, so let's test the science advocates out here.............

by NotaNess in

i'll start it off, then someone else give them a different challenge if you can think of any.. please give definitive examples that by evolution, a species has changed into something else.

give two separate findings by scientists, and it can't include any comments like "so we believe", "so we conclude that", or "the evidence shows that there could have been".....the wts has those copyrighted.. try and give un-doctored photographic proof, where possible, etc.

by the way the hominid skulls and the like will not be accepted, transition has never been proven, i don't think, just that they are different, and scientists "believe", they are pre-homo-sapiens.. i'm not saying you won't have examples, we just want you to walk the talk.

Abaddon

It would be really nice if Nota had the courtesy to respond to threads they started...

41

Creationism hiding in plain sight

by FireNBandits in

a friend pointed out to me that "theistic evolution" is, in essence, no different than intelligent design.

both postulate a creator that is behind creation.

both use the words "creation" and "creator.

Abaddon

Theistic evolution is the idea it happened exactly like science says it did, but god 'blew on the dice' of chance and steered things to its intended goal. At least that's my understanding of the definition.

I'm not one myself, but I often wonder why Creationists bother with all the bronze-age goatherd ideas about how things happened. Logically speaking, god could make the world any damn way it wanted, and if the evidence says evolution, then the goatherd is obviously mistaken.

Of course I know why many do cling to the literalistic stuff. If you make everything that simple, obvious, and black and white, it's really easy to cling to a silly Creation belief as if you insist that is right, you can also insist the moral code and beliefs you take from the same text are right.

It's silly; as has been pointed out, using the fruits of science most of the day, then saying it's wrong if the goatherd says something different. But it is easy and satisfying. Theological heroin.

As for such ideas belonging in school; in a religous education class where various beliefs re being compared, fine. How on earth are you going to teach it in a science class? What facts can you impart? How can you do a practical experiment (or lab work I think Americans call it)?

The whole ID movement is a trojan horse for largely Christian interference with science curriculums, as Creationtism in science class is now a hard sell even in Chickenshit Falls, Bulah County, Kentuky. Check you 'The Wedge' on Wikipedia.