- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bill Nye Smears Ken Ham
Posted on 2/10/14 at 12:57 pm to MagicCityBlazer
Posted on 2/10/14 at 12:57 pm to MagicCityBlazer
It really is a truly insane position to take.
So virtually all mammals that eat meat have similar teeth, and all mammals that are herbivores have similar teeth...but that means nothing?
lolololololol
You really have to be disingenuous to think that way.
So virtually all mammals that eat meat have similar teeth, and all mammals that are herbivores have similar teeth...but that means nothing?
lolololololol
You really have to be disingenuous to think that way.
0
Posted on 2/10/14 at 1:05 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Why would you like that retarded quote?
Because it was hilarious. The absurdity of that statement alone should be enough to convince people that Ken Ham is a lunatic.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 1:26 pm to heatom2
quote:
Because it was hilarious. The absurdity of that statement alone should be enough to convince people that Ken Ham is a lunatic.
Oh ok my bad. I thought you were saying he made a good point.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 1:31 pm to Fun Bunch
Yeah, it doesn't come off as sarcastic in the text as it sounded in my head..
Posted on 2/10/14 at 2:31 pm to REG861
All extinct animals are those species that supposedly didn't make it to Noah's ark, according to literal creationists.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 6:29 pm to samson'sseed
Good times
Posted on 2/10/14 at 7:11 pm to Projectpat
quote:
He's a moron and other morons will assume that he represents all of Christianity.
It's tough for to understand the rational of someone who says this is a holy book but it can't be taken literally you gotta dance around what it says to get to the true meaning. But my specific interpretation is definitely the correct one. I don't get it.
He takes the word of god litterally I don't see how any kind of religious person could fault someone for that. It is the word of god and that is above the law according to the word of god.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 7:16 pm to oklahogjr
quote:I presume you're not talking about Ham.
He takes the word of god litterally
Posted on 2/10/14 at 8:03 pm to samson'sseed
I didn't watch the debate.
But just for your information, any poll or vote doesn't necessarily mean that party won.
For instance if 98 percent of the people watching were libetals who hate God, and the guy wins by 92 percent, then the person with 8 percent vote actually won.
But just for your information, any poll or vote doesn't necessarily mean that party won.
For instance if 98 percent of the people watching were libetals who hate God, and the guy wins by 92 percent, then the person with 8 percent vote actually won.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 8:17 pm to S.E.C. Crazy
quote::laughingduckgif:
For instance if 98 percent of the people watching were libetals who hate God, and the guy wins by 92 percent, then the person with 8 percent vote actually won.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 8:42 pm to S.E.C. Crazy
shite you have to tip your hat to a man who has the balls to stand up and defend his position. So I commend both, right or wrong.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 8:52 pm to mattloc
quote:
shite you have to tip your hat to a man who has the balls to stand up and defend his position.
No I don't. I don't have to tip my hat to Ken Ham anymore than I do an anti-vaccine quack or a NAMBLA representative.
He's a hack who does a disservice to both science and Christianity.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 9:01 pm to Roger Klarvin
I wish Nye would have asked, "How do you know the bibles authors were inspired by god, where you there?"
Posted on 2/10/14 at 9:02 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:Agree.
He's a hack who does a disservice to both science and Christianity.
Problem is, having heard Nye discussing AGW, he's little better.
Nearly any junior-highschool halfwit could win an evolution debate if their opponent was a young Earth Creationist
Posted on 2/10/14 at 9:04 pm to KissmyAxe
quote:
I wish Nye would have asked, "How do you know the bibles authors were inspired by god, where you there?"
The problem is that the bible means whatever a believer thinks it means.
So a rational person hearing the worst parts of the bible is shocked and horrified; a believer just turns mass murder into 'God's plan'.
Just a bit of advice, stay away from the bible when trying to proselytize to Christians.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 9:08 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Problem is, having heard Nye discussing AGW, he's little better.
Nye is a hack because of something he said about AGW, which like evolution, isn't his field of expertise? Can you link me to what he said? Why does this make Nye a hack?
Posted on 2/10/14 at 9:11 pm to Roger Klarvin
Ahh.... Roger I thought you were ignoring me, but its good to see your insightful observations.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 9:13 pm to MagicCityBlazer
quote:
The problem is that the bible means whatever a believer thinks it means.
Exactly
Catholics and protestants differ wildly on their interpretations, so much so that many of each group thinks the other is going to hell.
It's absurd to base every decision and thought and opinion in your life around a book that even Christians can't agree on.
Posted on 2/10/14 at 9:20 pm to Roger Klarvin
Lets see now, you are already making wildly inaccurate statements, lets analyze one....
1. Each group thinks the other is going to hell.
Now this statement upon its face seems somewhat presumptuous. Is this your empirical observation, based on a limited sample size, I assume, or do you just harbor preconcieved notions for all groups with whom you disagree
1. Each group thinks the other is going to hell.
Now this statement upon its face seems somewhat presumptuous. Is this your empirical observation, based on a limited sample size, I assume, or do you just harbor preconcieved notions for all groups with whom you disagree
Posted on 2/10/14 at 9:26 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
protestants differ wildly on their interpretations
I don't think you can put protestants all in one group anymore they've branched and branched and branched until they're all only loosely based on the same book.
Page 2 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News