FreeHovind - WE ARE LOSIGN MAJORITY POWAH!!

WE ARE LOSIGN MAJORITY POWAH!!

14 Comments - 2634 Views

...ya right, like we had any of that to begin with :P, but srly lets do a head count.

Submitted By thebiblewascompiledin325AD on 09/04/12

FreeHovind, thebiblewascompiledin325AD, Creation and Evolution

srly we got soem fresh creation meat. and i would actually like to get some stats at the forum popualtiuon though.

so im' just gonna aks you to all writen them down so we know who we are dealing with. in order to avoid soem early mistakes, like calling rSwanson72 a creationist...which is isn't is he?

so i'll just like you to use the following setup to give us your basic stats regarding your beliefs.

Forum name:

Age:

Sex:

Religious (include denomination)/philisophical convictions (like buddism and atheism):

Converted y/n:

Creationist y/n

Motivation:

old/young universe (creationist or not):

Motivation:

Old/young earth creationist

Motivation:

flood/no flodd creationist

Motivation:

dino's walked with man y/n:

Motivation:

k that should do just about it for most people.

notice that this is all i ask. i don';'t want any flames, jokes or RL personal information (RLname, phonehumber, zip, diet choice, race, ect)

please use the basic set up.

and please do not reply to other posts, just 1 post per person so we can keep it overseeable.

any reples or suggestions you want to make about this initiative. please do so in another topics wiht copy paste title:

RE:WE ARE LOSIGN MAJORITY POWAH!!

» Reply to Discussion Threaded Hybrid Flat 14 Replies

thebiblewascompiledin325AD

5 days - 8,032v

Posted 2009/04/12 - 22:19 GMT

and being the poster it's only fitting i post first:

Forum name: Thebiblewascompiledin325AD

Age: 17

Sex: male

Religious (include denomination)/philisophical convictions (like buddism and atheism): Agnostic Atheist

Converted y/n: N

Creationist y/n: N

Motivation: i find it irrational to base your beliefs in the literal interpretation of 1 set of stories written by 40 different aurhors who had no conprehensive knowledge whatsoever of the narutal world around them 1800+ years ago, filled with epithorical myths and whos content was decided by popular vote a council of politiaclly minded roman priests, who ingored and destroyed all other contemporary versions but their own compiled work.

old/young universe (creationist or not): old 14+ billion years

Motivation:

background radiation, stellar and cosmological observations.

Old/young earth creationist: X

Motivation:

old earth; geology, fossil records, thernodynamics of earth core, radiometric dating, archeology, paleantology, stellar formation, age of the sun.

flood/no flodd creationist: X

Motivation: no way that a flood as desccribed by the bible could ahve happened. there would just be to much heat and there is not enough water in the planet. geology strongly testifies agains a level earth 4400 years ago. formation rates indicate age well beyond 4400years for many geological formations.

dino's walked with man y/n: N

Motivation: Fossil evidence, and the lack of "modern" fossils deeper down. lack of historical confirmation of various types of dinosaur.

if we lived with carnivorous dino's like T-rex, human kind would have had the oppertunities we had now. frankly the many hoaxes and misinformed cases creationist have brought up strengened my resolve that they have no real evidence for their claim and are resorting to public fascination and paranoia.

Corey S. (cms13ca)

10 hours - 500v

Posted 2009/04/12 - 23:09 GMT

Forum name: cms13ca

Age:32

Sex:Male

Religious/philosophical convictions: Agnostic, born into the Lutheran Church (ELCIC)

Converted: No

Creationist: No

Motivation: Creationism is a myth that was copied from pagan religions. There is much evidence that we evolved and that we are animals, not a separate kingdom (ie, plant/animal kingdoms).

Old/young universe: Old universe

Motivation: Evidence of old universe

Old/young earth: Old Earth

Motivation: Evidence of old earth, earth is not as old as the universe

Flood/no flood: No flood

Motivation: No evidence of a worldwide flood, impossible for it to happen.

Dinosaurs walked with man: No

Motivation: No evidence that humans and dinosaurs (along with other prehistoric animals/plants) have co-existed.

Maylon

11 hours - 938v

Posted 2009/04/13 - 0:32 GMT

Oh My !!!!!! This is so funny, thebiblewas..... I actually thought you were about 6, sorry could not help that.

Kent Clark (Brothertrucker)

1 day - 1,411v

Posted 2009/04/13 - 2:30 GMT

Whos we? Have you heard about the guy who was so far behind he thought he was first?

Isabella (WWDD)

12 hours - 1,085v

Posted 2009/04/13 - 4:12 GMT

Forum name: WWDD (Isabella)
Age: I’d rather not say, since it will probably be used against me. But I’m in university, so that should narrow it down.
Sex: Female.

Religious (include denomination)/philisophical convictions (like buddism and atheism):
De Facto atheist, which basically means that while I can’t be 100% sure that god doesn’t exist, the lack of evidence leads me to believe so. If I was provided evidence for a creator that outweighed the evidence we have for evolution, I would be more than willing to change my opinion.

Converted y/n: I suppose you could say I was converted from Catholicism to atheism. I spent the majority of my life as a Catholic. A very miserable Catholic.

Creationist y/n: No.
Motivation: There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that we have a creator.

old/young universe (creationist or not): Old
Motivation: They have empirically determined the age of the universe to a relatively high degree of accuracy. Creator or not, the laws of physics don’t change.

bigdog

4 days - 5,621v

Posted 2009/04/13 - 6:22 GMT

What is the best evidence for a young earth WWDD? So far we see that radiometric dating has too many problems to trust it. Geologic strata has been proven to be able to form quickly. So what hard evidence is there? Monkey skulls?

Sci Borg (doctorofscience)

3 days - 4,497v

Posted 2009/04/13 - 22:49 GMT

What is the best evidence for a young earth WWDD?

You really are thoroughly-ignorant of the concept of "burden of proof," aren't you? You made the claim, it's your responsibility to back it up.

Geologic strata has been proven to be able to form quickly.

To re-state the same point for the fourth or fifth time: it has

establishes that chalk layers CAN form rapidly, without providing any evidence that all (or even a significant number of) existing chalk layers DID form rapidly.

Not that I have any reason to expect that point to penetrate your shield of willful ignorance, that is.

Isabella (WWDD)

12 hours - 1,085v

Posted 2009/04/13 - 8:24 GMT

I don’t know what the best evidence for a young Earth would be Bigdog. As far as I’m concerned, you don’t have any.

As for the age of the universe, they do have evidence. You’ve probably heard of the Doppler effect, the idea that the velocity of a source can be determined by the frequency of the sound it emits. Well turns that the same thing is true for light waves. Because scientists know the elemental composition of stars, they can compare the normal spectrum to the shifted spectrum observed when a star or galaxy is in motion. A “blue-shifted” source is approaching, because the wavelengths are shorter. A “red-shifted” source is moving away from us. Turns out that everything around us is red-shifted and moving away. They calculated the velocity everything is moving, and traced it back to a single point in time from which the universe is expanding. By using this method, the universe was determined to be about 14 billion years old.

Of course that description is vastly oversimplified. If you want more information, you can look that up yourself. But this is only one of many methods that has yielded the same result. Not too surprising, since these measurements are based on scientific laws.

thebiblewascompiledin325AD

5 days - 8,032v

Posted 2009/04/13 - 10:35 GMT

OI TROLLS RESPECT THE TOPIC PLZ

POST what is aksed and QUIT TROLLING, or don't post at all.

i specifically asked you to troll OUTSIDE the post.

this is for a little statistics and to get rid of all the" what exactly is your worldview" questions which take up alot of time.

if you don't want to give your stats. don't do it. but don't troll the people who do.

debating of the arguements will happen OUTSIDE this topic.

and "evolutionists" please don't respond to their trolling, it'll only cloud the thread further.

(sigh kent*)

sci or WWDD just let them troll and don't post replies. at least that way we can keep the number of useless filling down.

Kent Clark (Brothertrucker)

1 day - 1,411v

Posted 2009/04/13 - 16:50 GMT

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz! wait a minute whats a losign majority and can I get it with cheeze?

Sci Borg (doctorofscience)

3 days - 4,497v

Posted 2009/04/13 - 19:58 GMT

*Sigh*

If you're just going to troll, at least try to do a decent job of it.

Molecular Biology kicks creationists ass (Ellman)

2 days - 2,415v

Posted 2009/05/03 - 22:34 GMT

Forum name: Ellman

Age: 20

Sex: Male ( last time i checked)

Religious (include denomination)/philisophical convictions (like buddism and atheism): Agnostic with a hint of buddhism

Converted y/n: n

Creationist y/n: no wai

Motivation: religion not science

old/young universe (creationist or not): about 4.54 billion

Motivation: stating the obvious, one side has the evidence

Old/young earth creationist

Motivation: no f-ing creao shit

flood/no flodd creationist

Motivation: flodd only in bangladesh and new orleans

dino's walked with man y/n: nope

Motivation: the spinosaurus would have raped every man of the face of the earth.

Blink

1 hour - 93v

Posted 2009/06/05 - 22:32 GMT

Forum name: Blink

Age: 19

Sex: Male

Religious (include denomination)/philisophical convictions (like buddism and atheism): Secular Humanist. It was mentioned in another thread:

"YOU MAY BE A SECULAR HUMANIST IF:

• You try to live an ethical and fulfilling life without religious belief.
• You think science and reason lead to more reliable knowledge than faith.
• You support secular government and an open society that guarantees human rights for all.
• You make sense of the world using reason, experience and shared human values.
• You see no convincing evidence for gods, the supernatural, or life after death.
• You believe that moral values are properly founded on human empathy and scientific understanding.
• You believe we must live this life on the basis that it is the only life we'll have -- that, therefore, we must make the most of it for ourselves, each other, and our world."

Yep, that's me.

Converted y/n: N

Creationist y/n: Nope

Motivation: Religion =/= Science

Old/young universe (creationist or not): X

Motivation: Scientific evidence indicates an old universe

Old/young earth creationist: X

Motivation: Examples already been stated in the thread.

flood/no flodd creationist: X

Motivation: Flood has been proven to be impossible

dino's walked with man y/n: Definately not

Motivation: For the same reasons already mentioned.

Decided not to go too in depth with the questions, I would just be repeating what everyone else said.

Sci Borg (doctorofscience)

3 days - 4,497v

Posted 2009/06/14 - 22:40 GMT

Forum name: Sci Borg (doctorofscience)

Age: 31

Sex: Male

Religious: No

Converted y/n: No (despite the efforts of some rather persistent Mormons)

Creationist y/n: Absolutely no.

Motivation: The absence of supporting evidence, and the Genesis story was clearly intended to be allegorical

old/young universe (creationist or not): No.

Motivation: The age of the universe can be directly measured & calculated, using the same principles that are the basis for everyday technology (atomic clocks, digitial computers, supermarket UPC scanners, etc)

Old/young earth creationist: No.

Motivation: Lack of supporting evidence plus overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

flood/no flodd creationist: No.

Motivation: All supposed evidence of the bliblcal flood has been thoroughly-debunked numerous times.

dino's walked with man y/n: No.

Motivation: Human beings would have made a nice bite-sized snack for just about any carnivorous dinosaur.

» Reply to Discussion Threaded Hybrid Flat 14 Replies